Social Justice, Housing and Local Government Committee - 09 September 2026

Good morning and welcome to the second meeting of the social justice, housing and local government committee in session seven. Agenda item one is on decision taking decisions uh in uh private um decide whether to take item five and all future discussions of evidence heard during the meeting in private. Are we all agreed? >> We're all agreed. to get off to a period of unonymity to begin with. And the second agenda item is to uh welcome the deputy first minister and the cabinet secretary for finance and local government and the uh minister for public finance in front of the committee for the the first time as it's the first time. Can I just congratulate both of you on your appointments uh to government particularly the deputy first minister and to say we look forward to close working uh relationship uh with you both and with your officials. will be uh very important portfolio, two very important portfolios uh and the committee looks forward to discussing both the program uh for government with you and also the upcoming uh budget. So Jenny Guruth, the deputy first minister, cabinet secretary for finance and local government is joined by Hannah Mary Goodlad, the minister for public finance and supporting them are Andy Caner who is the head of uh transforming planning, Katrina McKeen, deputy director for local government and Ian Surrey, the head of local government finance who are all from the Scottish government. So if I thank you collectively for uh joining us today uh cabinet secretary, this is obviously the first time you've been uh before us um as deputy first minister and minister uh for local government and obviously welcome to Hannah Mary good as well in that capacity. So we've had the program for government and the budget upcoming. So we'd like to invite both of you uh to make some opening remarks and obviously as this is the first time you're before us please do elaborate as much as as you wish in order to aid our scrutiny function. So cabinet secretary >> good morning convenor. I'm very grateful to the committee for the opportunity this morning to set out the Scottish government's priorities today alongside the minister for public finance. I'm happy to provide the opening comments from both of us in that regard. Local government planning and community empowerment are all areas uh which are fundamental to improving the outcomes of the people of Scotland. They are also the areas where partnership working is really essential. Local government is a vital partner in delivering our public services, supporting economic growth, tackling poverty, and helping our communities to thrive. Despite the challenging fiscal environment we face, the Scottish government has sought to provide stability and supports with record funding of 15.7 billion pounds being provided to local government in 2026 2027. Alongside this, we have provided greater flexibilities to local government than ever before with over 2.3 billion pounds of funding which was previously ring fenced or transferred in year now having been consolidated into the general revenue grant. Now alongside that investment, we are committed to strengthening the relationship between national and local government. I attended the first minister and Cosa president's first bianual meeting since the parliament elections on the 28th of July 2026 where we committed to regular engagement with Cosla to monitor progress towards those shared priorities. I also met with the causal leadership and the political group leaders over the summer recess where we established an agreed need for a reform of public services to meet complex demographic, fiscal and demandled challenges facing these services. Now, as announced by the first minister, the program for government is focused on community empowerment and our wider program of public service reform. We are committed to working in partnership with Cosa to drive that reform agenda and to ensure that services are sustainable and centered on the needs of our communities. To support this, we'll be engaging in an intensive dialogue over the next three months with partners in local government across the parliament and with stakeholders including representatives from local communities to reach that clear shared direction about the future of local government in Scotland. Planning of course has a crucial role to play in the delivery of our ambitions. And we're continuing to invest in planning capacity, improving performance, and work with stakeholders to identify practical reforms that will support development while maintaining confidence in the planning process. Our focus, of course, is on a planning system that enables delivery, attracts investment, and supports sustainable communities across the country. Now across each of these areas, our objective is clear to work in partnership with local government, communities and stakeholders to deliver public service reform to strengthen local democracy and of course to improve outcomes for the people of Scotland. So Miss Goodlad and I very much look forward to discussing these issues with the committee this morning and of course to answering members questions. Thank you uh very much cabinet secretary and for being remarkably brief despite the breadth of issues we have uh to cover. As this is your uh first opportunity in this session uh to appear before the committee, could you set out the Scottish government's main priorities for local government and could you identify three measurable outcomes that you expect to have improved by this time next year? >> Thank you. That's a very wide-ranging question. If I may reflect on those those areas to my mind in terms of our engagement with local government and I'm also conscious I have my minister beside me so Miss Goodlad will want to come in with her her reflections. Public service reform is really essential in terms of local government and I know we'll come on to talk about this in in more detail in due course but PSR um applies to local government in a way that it might not apply to other parts of the the public sector. So we have to work and start from a position of partnership working. The first meeting I undertook in my new role was with Cosa in parliament a few days after having been appointed and it was very clear to me at that time we need to continue that approach to partnership working. You know convenor I came from three years in the education brief and I could have delivered on none of my aspirations in education were not for partnership working with local government. So we have to start from that premise. The second point I would talk to is um local government sustainability. Again, I'm sure we'll come on to talk about that in in due course. But there have been a number of reports recently which caused me some concern around about the sustainability of local government finance at local level. Now obviously that is monitored for uh according to the accounts commissioned and of course con the committee will take a keen interest in local government sustainability. We have our own level of monitoring in house that considers some of these challenges more broadly but there are challenges at local level currently in terms of that local government sustainability. So PSR is a necessity h financially but the third point I would come on to is local democracy. Actually I think there is an opportunity through PSR to strengthen local democracy and I'm sure Miss Goodlad will want to say more on this point actually. So the third kind of tenant for me is how we strengthen local democracy in our communities. PSR is an opportunity for local government to be strengthened to allow people actually to reflect on the services that they receive. and we we I'm sure will come on to talk about COA's views in that respect. And I've spent a great deal of my time over the summer months with COA listening to their views as an organization directly representing their members, but we also need to recognize about the views of our constituent, the public, and they all have very strong views on public services. So, to my mind, a key part of our work on PSR in terms of local government reform and a priority for me is how we engage the public in this process, particularly in this three-month focus period. Our constituents have very strong views about their local services. They tell us when things are not working and I'm very clear actually that some things in our local communities are not working in the way that they should be currently. So local government reform is an opportunity to strengthen local democracy as much as it is to deliver on those wider efficiencies in terms of our priorities. I may bring in Miss Goodlad on some of her reflections in that regard as I think she may feel quite strongly on the latter point. I do uh obviously coming from Shhatland uh I see that autonomy works uh and I see that local democracy works as well. Um, now there's there's various solutions here and I I I thank Miss Goluth for her uh for her introduction. I I think it's fair uh and right and and sets out our broad agenda. Convenor, I think it's an excellent question around the three points because I'm very clear that we should be uh where where possible um because obviously government is is not a business but where possible we should be able to set delivery targets. Um three things I would like to see. I think I would I've always said that value is numbers, but it's also narrative. There's there's parts that we can place numbers on things uh within government, and then there's there's other things that are harder to quantify um because this is is not a business as as we all know. Three things I would like to see change. Um one, in May, I would like to see the turnout in local elections increase 44% uh in 2021. Um, I think there's room for improvement and if we get this right, as Miss Gill Ruth said, it's about democratizing our country and people uh and constituents should feel empowered to really get out to vote in terms of local elections. So I think that's the first thing I would like to see that the reforms that we take forward, the local democracy agenda that we take forward encourages folk to to get out and vote for these people that are going to be representing their local area because they'll have uh more decision-m uh locally. The second thing I would like to see which comes into the public sector reform and and Miss Guth touched on it is planning. there's a there's a variety of time scales uh relating to across the planning system whether it's major development housing whether it's housing development whether it's industry and business I would like to see more standardization and and faster time frames on that um if you look at if you look at the the time frames across those three uh buckets that I talk about they're different so so so more standardization across that would be very welcome a stretch target to see within a year's time um I think there's there's work for us all to do together on that to achieve achieve that and the third piece which is more on uh what Miss Guth was talking around the third item I would like to see which is harder to quantify is this part part around local decision- making what powers are existing that we could see more at a local level so people are feeling that they're empowered to take matters uh that really affect their communities and that is now a work in progress for the next three months with uh local government as to what that looks like, what's the requirement across the country. We've got different different uh authorities across the country. The islands are very different from the highlands. The highlands are very different from the central belt. What powers uh would folk like to see within their local area? Um and how do we increase that local democracy? So, the three things I would like to see an increased turnout, um planning, more standardized in terms of uh the wait time, uh and then more decision-m locally. Thank you, MCO Ruth. Obviously, we're not just talking about reform at the moment. The first minister's given a very heavy hint that we're talking about restructuring. What is wrong with the present structure of Scottish local government that means and necessitates that you're going to have to do something that's not happened for 20 plus years? Well, I think there are lots of ways in which if I can reflect on some of the first minister's comments in the debate last Tuesday, he spoke about unnecessary structures existing that actually prevent often the delivery of local services. And if we consider local government, we have quite a 32 local authorities. I know in my time in education often doing 32 different things. Now, on the one hand, that's good for local democracy because we have local decisions being taken to meet the needs of people. But on the other hand, sometimes that that difference and that variability we see, we may or may not come on to talk about the Pisa statistics, but that variability that exists across the country is not always a good thing. So it is important that we have an opportunity through reform to drive improvement for folk in terms of local services. Um I think it's also worthwhile saying that we are not forcing an approach to local government reform upon local government. We are saying to cause we want to work in partnership with you. which is why I I began my opening response to your first question by talking about an approach which is very much rooted in partnership working with Cosa and so we've set this three-month time frame to allow that focus dialogue to take us forward and what we see already coming to fruition is a number of local authorities already evidencing collaboration theers are a good example of that we also have the the single kind of authority model which Miss Goodlab may want to talk about from an island perspective but certainly is interesting to see that already there is a willingness from a number of our local authorities authority partners who know they want to they know they have to actually in terms of sustainability work together at a strategic level but are already moving in that direction. So I think that the necessity for change is partly driven by the financial outlook which the committee will be well versed in. There are challenges in that regard for local government but it's also driven because actually the economies of scale lend themselves to local government partners working together across a range of different areas. So I don't want to prejudge the outcome of this intensive dialogue that's taking place at the current time. I know through my own engagement with Cosa with local elected councilors the political engagement actually we had with cos in the summer was really helpful and because there are very strong views from our council group leaders at political level that things could be different and things could change. So there's an opportunity I think as much for local government in this too and I suppose one of the final points I would touch upon is the political context we find ourselves in with a new prime minister who is committed to a devolution agenda. Now we might differ on the constitution convenor in relation to the end point and where that gets you for Scotland but in terms of devolution there is an opportunity for a local government here in terms of further powers coming back to Scotland and flowing potentially to local government as well. And one of the interesting things about Mr. Bernham's approach of course is that he has said he will work with the Scottish Parliament on what works for Scotland. He will not foist an approach to local government in terms of further devolution upon us. That's certainly welcome. It's definitely a shift from his predecessor. So an opportunity therefore for the parliament and actually for this committee to help shape what that further devolution agenda might look like for local government in terms of further powers in that regard. I think there's a real appetite from our local government partners for further powers, further opportunity to drive the improvements they want to see in their communities. I don't think commino the status quo is working for our local communities at the current time. Um so there is an opportunity in that regard to improve services but also for our local uh government colleagues to really have that ambition and aspiration to use additional powers and additional funding which we would expect would flow from that offer from the prime minister in our local communities to help improve services in that regard. And I don't know if Miss Goodl wants to reflect on any of those points. I think I think it's important to look at the the situation and the context that we find ourselves in as well with regards to the Nordic neighbors that we have and regards to Europe uh councils and structures across the continent. Um some of our councils are too small to be strategic and some of them are too large to be local. >> They prompted my next next question because there is three months intensive engagement. Cynics might say three months is too short for that engagement, but the first minister did set out in his own words that some councils were too small to be strategic and some councils were too large to be local. So in his head and in the government's head, there is clearly new local government map of Scotland. Which councils are too small to be strategic in in your view and which are too large to be local? >> Just to assure you, there is no pre-prepared map from the Scottish government. we we're not forcing a system on our local government partners. Um it is the case we have a variety of different local authorities in the country. Some are much smaller than others and therefore it's much more challenging for them. So for example, cl manager council is an extremely small local authority. In recent times they've faced a financial challenge in relation to Kohl's nonton you will be aware that the government had to step in to provide an extra a million pounds of funding to provide reassurance to that local authority. a relatively small sum of money if I can observe communer but that funding made all the difference to cl manager because they were looking for that financial assurance that tells me a story about their sustainability but we've also had examples of events in local authorities in recent times where the government has had to step in to provide financial assurance and again that speaks to the wider sustainability agenda if we can look at Highland Council for example a a vast geographical area of Scotland a very large area of the country um which has to meet a a number of different challenges across the board and I know from my time in education how challenging it was for example for Highland Council to recruit teachers to come to the north of Scotland there are strategic issues that exist in part of the country that are not just about education they exist in our social care services as well across the delivery of public services. So having a a an approach to public service reform which recognizes that will allow in the future I would hope local authorities to be more local in many ways but actually to share that strategic risk at the current time in ways that they are not able to do so currently because of the way in which our local government structures are currently organized. >> Obviously Mr. McKe is looking at every aspect of the public sector and public service reform. Local government is a large percentage of the Scottish government's budget. headcount is the largest and and the the cost of staff is the largest percentage within that as you go through this process. How many jobs do you think could be lost in Scottish local government? >> Well, I think the first minister was asked about this. You'll be aware convenor on Sunday and um you know I don't think at this time we're going to attribute figures in that regard. What I would say though is trade union partnership working is really important in in this regard. Um so Mr. McKe and I had focused engagement with the SDU um a few weeks ago now during August. We also engaged with trade union partners back in June through a PSR event in Glasgow. And what we've agreed to with the STU is that we're going to have a a roundt with all of our trade union partners to talk to these issues in the round because we're very clear we can't force public service reform on local government, nor would we wish to, but we are going to see a reduction in relation to headcount across the public sector. The first minister has been open about that. We're not going to attribute a a head figure or headcount figure rather convenor today. I think some of these arguments were rehearsed in the the chamber last week. The final point I suppose I would make is the government exists in a parliament of minorities. So even if we wanted to to force this upon local government, we couldn't. So we need to work in partnership with all parties that are represented here and some who are not in that regard. And we will continue to have that cross party dialogue um in my own engagement. We've already engaged convenor on some of these issues. We've set forward an approach to um a round table with uh on a cross party basis to look at some of the financial uh the fiscal kind of outlook at the current time but also ahead of budget to work on a cross party basis on on all of these issues because we have to reflect the government does not you know hold all the cards here. So working on that cross party basis will be imperative. So as much as I'm here to answer your questions today, convenor, I'm also really interested to hear views from committee members around about how we drive this agenda forward in a parliament of minorities because we have to work together on these things. >> And just in relation to public sector unions, you obviously had engagement with EIS when you were the education secretary. Um I heard a rather bicos response from uh unison after the program for government. >> If unions become the roadblock to reform, >> what's your strategy to manage that? So my experience of engaging with trade unions in education and actually also in transport has always been a positive one and certainly my experience of engaging with the STU thus far SD rather was that the trade unions come to the table with a number of ideas and proposals here on how efficiencies might be delivered. I don't view them as a roadblock to the work we're taking forward in relation to public service reform. They have very clear views in relation to their memberships and it's quite right that they protect their membership and they do all they can to advocate for them. That's our job as trade unionists. um but they also have lots of really great ideas. So we had a a really interesting meeting uh with Ross Foyer um during August Mr. McKe and I from which we've taken away a number of suggestions which we will come back to the table with um in a few weeks time when we engage with the trade unions on a broader basis. So I I don't view the trade unions in that space. They are a partner as much as local government are in this uh kind of space and we have to work collectively in that regard. >> I'm going to bring Kate Campbell in a second just but just one final question on on local government finance. When I um questioned the Scottish Fiscal Commission earlier this year, it calculated that the like forlike real terms increase in local government funding for the period 2627 was 0.4% much less than the 2% headline figure that was being used by ministers. Uh and they also said that the spending review implied real terms reductions of close to 500 million pounds uh by 2829. The accounts commission now says that local councils face a 529 million pound gap this year even after increasing council tax by 7.7%. So do you accept on the basis of that external independent analysis that on the current funding trajectory councils may have to reduce or stop services or cut their workforce? No, I I think to the overall view convenor um the accounts commission have been very clear that across I think the last four financial years local government finance has increased in real terms in every single one of those years and of course last year was a record settlement of 15.7 billion pounds. So I don't accept all of the challenge there. It is undoubtedly the case that the fiscal outlook for for Scotland is challenging. Um and we'll come on perhaps to talk about that later. But um well, we will also have to reflect on the spending review being informed by decisions taken by the UK government in terms of where Scotland is able to go in that regard. We have always done our best to protect and enhance local government settlement. We've done that in the last four financial years and I'll continue to work with local government partners on how we can best protect their their spending and also uh look at opportunities for enhancements where that we are able to deliver that. But I have to reflect convener that these are very challenging financial times that we exist in at the current time and that means that all parts of government will be impacted by that and I know that as we approach budget we'll discuss these issues in more detail with the committee. >> So the new music you're sending to government for the next financial years it's going to be tight. >> It's going to be challenging. >> Fine. Super Klina and thank you for your evidence so far. I I think I should start by declaring an interest until three months ago I was a counselor at the city of Edinburgh Council. Um I was interested just maybe to slightly circle back but I think the conversation that's just been had around um headcount and the kind of challenging fiscal um position. I I don't want to preempt the outcome of the discussions at local government, but is it the ambition of government that actually is we see one of the outcomes from the restructure could be that we actually see an increase of frontline workers across uh local government um and better service delivery as we look at the the restructure. >> So um I thank Miss Campbell for the question through if I could reflect on my time as cabinet secretary in the budget process. We were very keen through um the portfolio efficiency plans which all cabinet secretaries set out to parliament in January this year through the budget process to protect frontline workers. That was a key aspiration and focus for all cabinet secretaries. Um I have to reflect at the current time that as the first minister has said that our view is that the size of the public sector in Scotland is going to have to reduce and that will bring with it a level of headcount reduction. Our focus though is very much on protecting frontline workers. So I don't want to prejudge the outcome of where we get to with local government and trade unions in that regard. But to give an assurance that our focus has been on protecting frontline workers in my role in education. It will not surprise the committee. I was very keen throughout the last three years to protect teacher numbers. To me that was a really important input because having the right number of staff in our schools, we talk about things like the PISA results is actually hugely important. So I think mindful of the impact of uh reducing frontline headcount, we have been very focused as a government on protecting that thus far and that has been our approach that's been set out in the portfolio efficiency savings plans that were communicated to parliament earlier this year. >> You bring in the deputy convenor Thomas K. >> Thank you chair and thank you deputy first minister for your evidence so far and to the minister as well. Um I should put on the record to declare my interest as a sitting counselor in Glasgow. Um, deputy first minister, you'll no doub's accounts commission report which was pretty brutal reading I think for all local authorities. Um, it paints a pretty bleak picture for local councils and democracy and accountability right across the board but particularly in my home city of Glasgow. Um, the report made clear the eye watering figures facing the city identifying a budget gap of around 110 million pounds between 2026 27 and 202728. And if you'll allow me, I'll just read quickly what they said, which was Glasgow City Council is at a critical point as it tries to tackle financial pressure, rising homelessness, growing demands for services, persistent high level of poverty, and unresolved equal pay claims. So, I'm just wondering on the back of that report, have you had any conversations with Glasgow City Council since the report came out? >> So, I have engaged with Glasgow City Council over the course of summer recess. not since the report came out although the cabinet secretary for social justice met with them last week Wednesday so she engaged with them last Wednesday I think it it's challenging for a number of different reasons if we can recount though the accounts commission report they talked about a notional shortfall I think of £592 million but the budget delivering an extra 620 million this is nationally and all local government all uh parts of Scotland were able to balance their budgets in 2627 so I think it's important to recount that sustainability in terms the Glasgow um deputy convenor is right to talk about some of the issues in relation to equal pay and of course the local um government in Glasgow at the current time they are having to respond to challenges that are not of their making um and I think that that needs to be reflected. I have written to the UK government actually and so has the cabinet secretary for social justice to request a meeting on some of the wider issues here around about Glasgow particularly in relation to their equal pay liabilities because they're having to shoulder a burden here which we view as being deeply challenging for them. We did in the course of last year's budget though look to provide additionality to Glasgow and of course through their budget settlement uh for 2627 Glasgow is receiving 1.8 8 billion pounds to fund local services including homelessness services. So they've had an increase over 7% since 2526 and I think the committee is perhaps taking evidence from um the social justice secretary next week. So she may want to say more on that but we have looked to provide that additionality and support to Glasgow recognizing some of the challenge there and you may be aware of correspondence I've shared with Glasgow City Council that gives them some assurance around about looking at what we might be able to do through the budget settlement to once again recognize some of the challenges that are unique to Glasgow and face at the current time in that regard. >> I thank the deputy first minister for that because I think it is a really really crucial point. I've been a council for almost a decade in Glasgow and every single year we are facing a huge huge pressure on our finances as all councilors are but in particularly the the financial settlement in Glasgow has been particularly bad. Um you will be aware deputy first minister that the current um leader of Glasgow City Council is stepping down tomorrow and a new leader Ricky Bale is is coming in. Um I know that you may be happy with that. I have my skepticism but we'll leave the politics at that part. I don't know if you heard last week councelor Bell on BBC Radio Scotland. um he said and I'll quote just so you know >> I did here I'll quote it just so you've got the quote though please do um looking at some of the policies that their government that the Scottish government that say in Scotland if you present yourself as homeless you can choose which part of the country you want to present yourself the government either needs to change legislation or to fund the outcomes of that now obviously last week at first's questions first minister made it very clear that there will not be any policy changes so I'm just wondering if you can put on the record will the Scottish government step in to fix that because you're right about the equal pay claims but part of the huge financial pressures. We're facing the £75 million because of the homelessness pressures that's added on as well. So, will the Scottish government be funding to help that huge that's on our budget as well? >> So, I I heard councelor Bell's views and um I certainly wish Council Raikin very well. I think she's led Glasgow City Council extremely well over the a number of years and welcome councelor Bell to post and I will meet him officially when he is appointed in in the coming weeks. Um you you heard I think um Mr. care the views of the first minister and of the government in relation to the local connection view at first minister's questions last week. We are not of the view that that policy is the the challenge here. We are of the view though that UK government asylum policy has created real challenges for local authorities and the root of the cause here is a broken asylum policy and we have asked the UK government repeatedly to look at that policy again to treat people with dignity and respect and actually to look again and reconsider that approach. So we've asked of course um and we support actually the call from Glasgow City Council in that regard for the UK government to provide adequate funding to support um newly recognized refugees and communities in particular. That is our view and we've communicated that to the UK government and in fairness to the UK government thus far as I recounted in my um opening comments we have seen a shift in direction. So I am hopeful the UK government will listen to the the ask from Scottish government but also from Glasgow City Council on some of the matters that are raised but we don't share the view that you've expressed Mr. K today on the local connection rule. We want to treat people with dignity and respect. Um and in terms of funding our view is that the issue here relates to the UK government's approach to asylum which is exactly why we'll pursue this matter with the UK government in relation to the financial challenge. you preempted my next question which was going to be on the back of the UK government because you are correct and and as a counselor in Glasgow I I've tried to work cross party with all parties to try and find a solution to this because the issue is to do with the UK government asylum process but it is also to do with the pressure of Scottish government policy that's what Ricky Bell said it's not me that's saying this it's not just reform the incoming SNP leader of the council has said that now I totally accept that the policy of the government is not going to change on this issue that's absolutely fine I'm wondering you've mentioned that you have had dialogue with the UK government have have Scottish government officials met with the UK government because I know that the council has reached out. The UK government has not been interested in meeting Glasgow City Council to discuss this issue. Has the Scottish government decided to step in to try and put more pressure on the UK government to take its share of its burden in terms of how much money they should be given to the council because as council Bell alluded to that 75 million is huge. And if that was to disappear, Glasgow City Council's black hole would go from 110 million to 35 million. That's a lot more doable to try and manage in terms of going forward. So the Scottish government has its part to play and I'm hopeful that you will listen to council bell on that part. But have you had any dialogue with the UK government about how will they try and step in to fix this issue as well? >> So I've had my initial meeting with the chancellor and I have also correspondent with the UK government on some of these issues um as has the cabinet secretary for social justice. Neither of those letters have yet received a response but we have specifically raised those issues in correspondence with the UK government. And I'd be happy actually convener if that's helpful to share copies of that correspondence with the committee and also hopefully to share a response from the UK government as and when that's received but we have not yet at the current time received the response to either of those pieces of correspondence. >> That's that's very very useful. Um the last part I was going to say just on this back of this part deputy first minister was that in the same interview um councelor Bell said that Glasgow is carrying the burden for the whole of Scotland. Now that's that's pretty stark words from a a a counselor from your own party. He he's been very very open about challenging the Scottish government. Again, can I push back on the funding mechanism? How much will you give to Glasgow to try and fix this issue? Because councelor Bell has been very clear that s part of this issue lies with your department. It lies with your government. It lies with this government. So, how much will you give to Glasgow City Council to try and fix that 110 million pound black hole before we go into our budget process which is going to be in a couple of months time? So I think quite an interesting kind of proposition if I may observe Mr. Ker because of course a level of the challenge here as you've just accepted yourself does not come from policies made by this government and yet is this government that's expected to step in and fill that kind of challenge. Well we can agree to disagree perhaps but if in relation to equal pay um and the broader issues to give the committee assurance I have written to the UK government on these matters as has Miss Somerville. We haven't yet had that response in terms of the funding settlement for Glasgow. are recounted in my original answer to you. The uplift in funding, significant uplift in funding provided to Glasgow in this year's funding settlement and the assurance I have given to the council leadership that we will once again look again favorably at Glasgow's position in relation to budget allocations. I have to remind committee of course I don't yet know from the UK government what the allocation will be for Scotland. So we are somewhat prejudging the outcome of the UK government's budget which won't be until the end of October. As soon as we have that information, we'll be able to engage with Glasgow in more details and in fact uh throughout the summer months. There have been there has been extensive engagement with Glasgow at an official level and also a political level between myself, Miss Somerville and the council leadership. That dialogue will continue as we approach the Scottish government's budget and I have given that assurance to Glasgow City Council around about our approach to the budget this year which will very much mirror in my view the approach that was taken in the previous financial year. >> Perfect. On a more general point, just lastly to finish up on the issue, you mentioned in your evidence about more devolution down to local authorities. I think that's something that all local authorities and all counselors or former council sitting around this table would agree with. We want to see more powers come down to our local authorities particularly to help with the funding gap that we're facing because I think sometimes we are at the brunt of decisions made from UK and Scottish government level and then we are asked to deliver the services. So I'm just wondering from your idea, you personally rather than just the government, have you any ideas of what sort of policies you would like to see devolved down? So what sort of tax measures, what sort of funding mechanisms would you like to see local authorities have to be able to try and raise some more of their own income? >> Deputy Convenor, I've been a minister for a number of years now, so I think it would be remiss of me at committee this morning to announce different taxes that may be passed on to local government. I'm not going to do that. I think there's a general point to be to be made here which is that local government has an opportunity through further devolution and through PSR to gain more in terms of responsibilities but also in terms of uh the financial opportunities that that may lead to and um again I think the approach the government has taken while we may debate it and the three-month period perhaps being too short or not long enough this is an opportunity for cause local government to grasp the nettle here and really to see a transformation in terms of the way in which we deliver public services. So I I won't announce today any views around about specific taxes. You will forgive me, but I think doing so would be quite wrong for me to set that out. This has got to be about partnership working. So I go back to the points I made to the convenor at the start of the evidence session. We cannot and we will not force a system on local government. We will work in partnership with local government in that regard. And local government, as you well know, as a servant councelor, have very strong views in relation to their powers and what additionality might be provided to local government as a result of PSR and further devolution. So we'll continue to work with Cosa in that regard to develop a partnership approach and a shared approach that I hope that uh can be coalesed around not just with COA but also across the parliament in terms of that cross party support. I'll add in to that point you'll be aware as well deputy convenor that there's a a vast array of difference across our country. Our diversity in terms of our geography, our industries, our business and what local uh local councils are requiring is different. So that's going to look different from from the north to the west and to the south. So that's why we're embarking on this three-month program now of intense dialogue, intense collaboration. And you know, 3 months is quarter of a year. That's ample time to be able to come together and and find a solution if you have both sides of the the coin coming to the table in order to be able to really focus in on what matters. uh and I'll refer you back to to to to a scholar uh Simon Sneck. I think uh some of the stuff that he does on leadership and culture is wonderful. And he has this golden circle and there's three words within the circle. You start off with the why. Then you move into how and then you decide what. What we are starting with here is why does this need to change in terms of democracy, in terms of making people more accountable within their communities. And as the three months go, we'll get into the why and the what. But we it would be remiss to start from the opposite and work in because people don't care what you do. They care why you do something. >> Thank you. Before I bring in more and mellum, I think Gary B supplementary question something. >> Thank you. And again, I will refer to my register of interest as a sitting fit counselor, former um resources portfolio holder and housing portfolio holder. Um we're talking about three months and we've heard a bit of challenges particularly in Glasgow and there's different challenges in different areas in every every area of Scotland but there's also a lot of good stuff that local councils do and and at the moment we've heard all the negative side and I understand that but what are minister and cabinet secretary sorry I should have said welcome first of all when they're looking at that about bringing out the positives. I I know the positives and the negatives from from the area represent um but there'll be others that will be able to help us and the challenges we we'll be able to go over by dealing by learning from other councils and not always the next door neighbor. It could be it could be all over. So is that going to be a big part is of the review is probably the question I'm going >> I think Mr. B actually hits on a really important point. A lot of the work that is undertaken at local level is really good work and we will all see that as MSPs in our communities that it's maybe not the things that are shared in the chamber often but there's some fantastic work happening in our local communities often being driven at council level not at Scottish government level and we should recognize that and not lose that in the the mire of public service reform. I also had appreciated how many councilors we've got around this committee. Yeah, a number of you. There are there are opportunities I think through strategic approaches to share best practice and um looking at how we share services definitely has to be one of the ways in which we can deliver on public service uh efficiency and and saving the the money that we know needs to happen as a result of this process but also through sharing good practice. So the air we you gave as an example earlier on. If I can lean perhaps on some of the work um not in local government but still in a PSR space that the NHS is leading on. I was in Kcotti last Wednesday morning visiting um their kind of hospital at home approach chatting to some of the clinicians there about the challenges they have across health boards around sharing medical information between clinicians and we know that that impacts on patient care as a result things are slowed down h and patients don't necessarily receive the type of care that they otherwise could have if we had a more efficient approach now that exists in local government all over the place I know in education we have get lots of systems across our local authorities why do we duplicate things there there are real opport opportunities for savings here, but also for a more efficient approach that will be better for our communities ultimately. And I think the test of public service reform will be the public's view of their local services. And so that's why to my mind this isn't just about engagement with trade unions and cause, it's also got to be about engagement with the public. So um just in discussion actually with officials prior to the evidence session around about how we build that in in this three-month period and if the committee has strong views on that, actually the committee may be able to assist in hearing views from the public. You know, ultimately that is the test of public service reform. If things are getting better for folk in their local communities and everyone um knows when things are are working well, there are opportunities through that strategic approach to sharing services to deliver that across the across the country. But there are also opportunities through PSR to listen to the folk we all represent. And that shouldn't just be a one-off event during an election. It actually should be a key part of the way in which we reflect as elected members on how we're carrying out our duties. So I I think the real test of public service reform really will be in that public engagement space. >> Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. I think that segus very neatly into more of me. >> Thank you very much. Thank you for your contributions so far. Um I'd like to declare that I am also a counselor for council. >> Before we begin, um I would like to look a little bit more about overcoming barriers for people to stand in local elections. So, one in three female counselors stepped down in the 2022 elections, which implies that female counselors have not been given enough support. Among some of the reasons cited for why they stepped down was harassment and abuse due to their gender. So, I was wondering what measures are being put in place to address this before the May elections next year. >> So, I know that COS have been engaged on a number of these areas um over a number of years now to help improve representation. parties have a level of responsibility as well in terms of supporting their elected members. So, and parties take different approaches to this in terms of promoting positive discrimination. My own party has taken a range of different measures in this space over a number of years. Um, and as a result, we've got much better female representation particularly in here than we did previously. And in terms of the abuse that women face in politics, I'm sure as a woman in politics, Malum will already have experienced it. And and that is regrettable because it has become normalized in our our politics. And I think that is the detriment of um representative democracy and um we need more women standing for election in our local communities. I suppose the test of this will be in the elections next year in terms of local government elections. There's also been some suggestion that because councilors are in our local communities, they're more accessible perhaps than local MSPs and that actually counselors experience a different level of abuse in their communities than MSPs and MPs do. And I think I have some degree of sympathy with that certainly because local councils are often dealing with some of the the hardest things and they're not paid as well as MSPs and MPs and they often find that that challenge may put them off standing for elected office in the first place and we don't want that to be the case. So we have a number of local counselors at the table here today who will know more on this sub subject than I do. But I certainly know from my own experience how corrosive social media has been even in the last 10 years I've been an MSP. shift has pushed women and minorities out of elected office because they're voting with their feet to go elsewhere. It's not good for our democracy. So, there's more that we can do in this space. Coal have undertaken a program of work actually um in relation to supporting women in elected office um which I know a little of in my own experience. But again, I would go back to the point that parties have a level of responsibility here to support their elected members and also to take action to encourage minorities and women to stand for office in the first place. >> Thank you very much. And that leads quite nicely onto my next question in the same sort of ring. So 56% of counselors are aged over 55. In my experience, younger counselors are concerned about re-entering employment after their term. While the increased enumeration goes some way to addressing this, I was curious to know if the Scottish government would be supportive of creating a recognized qualification for counselors that not only aids them in their role, but would also evidence their skills and would aid them when applying for jobs after their term is finished. >> I thank Miss McCullum for a question that is not something that's ever been put to me before. Um, I'd be more than happy to to take advice from officials and write to the committee on that. I think on the face of it that wider challenge about re-entering the jobs market having served in the elected office if particularly if you've been a local counselor must be very challenging. So I I'll take that away as a suggestion from today's committee if Miss McCullum would be content and I'm happy to correspond with the committee on the art of the possible on that topic. I think she raises a very important and interesting point. I'd like to add into that. So it's it's I I you know I support the DFM's uh writing to the committee because this is about creating space for ideas as well and we rely on you uh to work with us to come with good ideas. Um having lived and worked in Norway for almost half a decade, this is something that they do quite frequently across uh their private and public sector. They try and increase that crossover in a very systemic and structured way so that you're able to create a society that understands the dilemmas and challenges from from either side of the the low fence and they have systems and processes around it to be able to recognize h on both sides. So I think it's a very interesting idea um and one that we should explore. >> Thank you very much. That's a very positive response which is always wonderful. Um if it's okay I just have one last question which is around the the house survey. Um so the government's own house surveys highlighted that only 19% of people feel that they can influence decisions in their area which is down from 24% in 2015. I was curious to know what the government is doing to try and address that and rectify it. So I think overall some of the figures here speak to um a shift I suppose an apathy that people a growing apathy between the public and and elected members and that actually has not any connection to party politics. Folk are getting fed up with the process. They don't feel as connected to it as they did previously. I think my own constituency in the last election was the second lowest turnout in the country and that troubles me greatly because people are opting to stay at home and we know at a time actually when our democratic institutions are arguably under attack um engagement in the democratic process you're really getting a modern studies teachers lesson here this morning sorry about that but engagement in the democratic process has never been more important than it is now so we've got to encourage that actually education's got a really key role to play here but I think from a government perspective we need to evidence how local democracy delivers in communities and my argument and view would be that public service reform is the opportunity to deliver on that. It's about in many ways showing people how their local services how their taxes actually deliver for them in their local communities. And I think that disenchantment that people feel with local services is often uh contributed by when they're not able to get appointments or they're not able to access services locally. PSR has got to address that in the round and I think it's a real opportunity to strengthen local democracy in that regard too. >> I'll add I'll add to that point I'll add to that point in that strengthening local democracy PSR is the vehicle to do so. And I look at Scotland today and I see a country that in elements of whether it's the rise of the far right, whether it's racial tension, whether it's violence against women, it's a country not entirely at peace with itself. And my fear is that as people pull back and disengage from that democracy, that is only going to grow. And we as politicians, we all have a duty and a care to be able to treat these points of tension with calm. And as people withdraw back, they fill that vacuum within the misinformation space online. So if we get this right in terms of democratizing our country, we can actually have a country at the end of the five years, that is more at peace with itself, that is actually starting to tackle some of these really large underlying forces that give me concern and keep me awake at night, violence against women, the rise of the far right, the the rise of racial split within Scotland. And it all comes back to care over the communities that we live in and care for our neighbor and care for a welcoming community that we want to create and that we know Scotland is. But it starts about democratizing our country and that starts right at the beginning, right at the base. It's not going to be done from an ivy tower here in Hollywood. So it's incredibly important that we get this right. And my plea is that this must be a cross party. every one of us sitting around this table. We have an opportunity for PSR to get this right and to make sure sure that Scotland is more at peace with itself. >> Thank you, >> Cabinet Secretary. I'm sure you would not want to be run by your officials and I'm sure you'd want to have the capacity to challenge your officials. And one of the criticisms that I frequently hear from counselors of all political persuasions is that after they're elected, they hit a brick wall, which is often the distinction between being an elected representative and the authority held by officers within uh within councils, some of whom use their powers to go through the standards process to challenge criticism that is legitimately made legitimately made against them by by counselors. counselors can be taken through the standards process for criticizing policy or criticizing um officers. And in light of recent standards cases, I'll give you an example. For example, um I've locked knocked on a hell of a lot of doors across the south of Scotland and I don't think it would be a a mystery to anybody or a surprise to anybody to hear that local government is held in pretty low esteem. >> Yeah. The lowest esteem of any local authority that I've come across is the priest and Galloway which I think knocked on >> come to >> tens of thousands of doors and uh the lowest in which officers and counselors is held is is quite alarming for for local democracy. But when I speak to counselors they say we're very very constrained in what we can do because the officers hold all the cards. So, is it time potentially to reopen uh discussion around the code of conduct and that balance between councelor's uh elected authority and the delegated authority held by officers. >> So, that's an interesting point, convenor. I'm I'm conscious I think there was a case in Glasgow recently that I don't want to stray into providing public commentary on for obvious reasons. Um and the relationship that counselors have with their officers is very different I think from the relationship that ministers have with officials who provide us with advice and we can agree with it or we can say can we change it or regularly I speak to my officials and we'll look at advice and and have different approaches to it but we always do that in a kind of conversation in a discursive space. So my own experience probably wouldn't match that of some of that that you set out. I hear the challenge though. Um I think that that I think it's very difficult for me to provide public commentary on that. Um I know that when I was education secretary, I was often quite surprised to read in the press commentary from officials in Glasgow City Council for example and in other parts of the country and I would say to my officials in Scottish government, it's interesting because you would never read public commentary from a civil servant in the same space. So the the way in which I suppose official advice is given to counselors differs from that of ministers. So I would just reflect on that difference. Um but you do al light on a challenge. It's difficult for me to provide commentary on it. I think through PSR there may be an opportunity to consider some of these issues in the round but that would be something that I would wish that Cosa would lead on in that regard given they have the expertise as opposed to Scottish government and I'd be keen to hear if cos have a holistic view on this what that might be and then of course the government could respond to that accordingly through this three-month period of engagement. It's not something I should say that cause have have highlighted with me thus far in the engagement process, but I'm I'm keen to hear all views in relation to public service reform, including how our counselors are supported to carry out their democratic duties, which is actually the nub of your questioner, how our counselors can deliver in the communities that they are elected to represent. >> Yeah. Before I bring in Steve Bonner and go on to um social care, which I think is a very live issue, I think Thomas K's got a brief supplementary. >> I think you you took my fun. That was the question I was going to come in with because it is I mean we're speaking about barriers of elected members deputy first minister. One of the biggest barriers of opposition councils in particular is there is a scunned factor with local representatives about the fact that you don't really get to challenge properly. And you you referred to the case I'm not going to ask you to comment on the case but you refer to the case of council FA Higgins who has evidence of counselors not just from her party but from all political parties who have faced barriers again with that issue of trying to challenge officers trying to challenge issues or try to challenge policy and then up against it when officers are then referred to the standards commission. indeed you were you were education secretary when the whole fiasco around the education cuts came. Um so you'll note very very well the issue that was kicking off and so it is something that I would just refer to what the the convenience said it would be something I would really push the government to have a look at because if you want to try and break down those barriers for us as counselors to do our jobs we need to be able to scrutinize not just decision makers in terms of elected officials but those who are the ones who come up with the policy decisions. Um, so looking at the code of conduct is a big big barrier to being able to get real local democracy to work properly if you want good scrutinizing counselors to be there. They need to be able to be able to do their jobs properly. >> Okay. So I I hear that the point that deputy kafir has made. I'm very aware of the case and of course the issues around about Glasgow in terms of education cuts um which of course I was education secretary at the time. So I'm I am okay with the detail. I'm not going to provide public commentary on it for for good reason. I think though in the round this is a matter that I would want to engage with cos on directly. I think that would be quite right and proper. They haven't thus far raised it with me. Um but I'm more than happy to take away um and to hear actually from Cosa if this is an issue that they want to pursue. They have not thus far co have not raised it with me. Um although I'm sure there will be views around some of the issues that you have raised today. >> Thanks. Just turning to social care and before I bring in Mr. Obviously the last parliament was characterized by inertia nothing much happening in relation to social care because of the creation of the national care service which hit the buffers in in in two chapters. This in this parliament it appears that we are going to see some movement in social care and it's away from local government towards reformed health boards. What consultation have you had with local government in relation to this quite significant shift? And isn't this effectively national care service Mark three because we're losing that local democratic accountability through um health and social care partnerships, IGBs and local authorities potentially. >> So um you're right to recount some of the challenge we faced in this space in the previous parliament and again I would reflect that the government exists in a parliament of minorities. So that's not going away and we will need to um attract support for this policy and the first minister has been very open about that which is why we've not predetermined a destination in relation to local government reform and actually in relation to the health board approach where we set out an approach but we also need to engage with the opposition on on where we get to in relation to the kind of agreed proposal. Um again I I would kind of push back and say that we haven't taken final decisions in relation to social care at the current time. We've set out a trajectory in relation to health reform and an approach that would see the health boards for example lead in relation to social care but um local government have to be engaged in these conversations and that engagement has already started as I I spoke to at the start of the session we had sessions with local government back in May that intens kind of the three-month period that we've set out as part of the answer here but we've also had engagement throughout the summer months in relation to social care. It is an issue that local government regularly and routinely raise with Scottish government. It was raised with me at the political meeting I had with group leaders in August and it has been raised with me consistently h with local government and with coa throughout that time. was raised with the first minister when we met with the presidential team in but house a number of weeks ago now and of course on Friday I should say convenor there will also be a special meeting of um cos and group leaders along with the first minister myself and Ivan McKe and it may be that um I write to the convenor on the back of that meeting if that would be helpful to share more detail from um any of the outcomes that have arisen from that meeting because I appreciate we're going to be moving at relative pace in the next three months in relation to the next steps so we have not arrived at a final destination in relation to social care we have to work with local government. It was challenging in the previous parliament in this space for all the reasons convenor you are aware of. So I go back to the point about partnership working um and actually there's an opportunity here. The other point I would make around about IG IGBs and integration is from a health board perspective they would tell you this is not working and that budgets are not aligned and actually this can be deeply challenging in terms of the way in which they deliver services. We look for example at delayed discharge and some of the issues that exist in our local communities there. the approach to budgeting here is not helpful to to people in our communities actually and the services that they experience. So I suppose I do go back to the points on partnership working but also the point I made to carry vice. The issue here is about how we improve our services for the people we all represent. So we're not foisting a system on local government in relation to social care. We're working with them and that three-month period allows us to come to hopefully a consensus in relation to the next steps on social care. You're right to highlight the challenge in the last parliament. We're very keen to avoid that. we only can deliver on arriving at that shared consensus through partnership working. So that's the approach we'll continue to to take and I'm more than happy to write to the committee on the back of Friday's meeting to share any further detail that arises from that engagement with Cosa. >> Okay, Mr. Bon, can I welcome you both and thank both of you for your evidence so far this morning. One of the themes of this parliamentary session is undoubtedly going to be the challenges that we're facing. It's even been a theme of the meeting so far and one of the biggest challenges within that I think is going to be the sustainability and funding of our social care sector. The accounts commission have seen the integrated joint boards have reached a critical point and face a significant risk of becoming unsustainable financially within a 12 to 24 month period. What's your assessment of of that? I think um the overall assessment from the accounts commission is deeply challenging and um we would agree in Scottish government that that needs to be resolved. The sustainability of where we are just now is in itself an argument for public service reform. It tells us the status quo is not working and there are a number of counselors in the room just now and former counselors who all will recognize this um in the level of detail that they would as elected members um that actually where we are just now in terms of budgeting for for these services is not sustainable. So the accounts commission is telling us a story that we know exists in our communities just now in relation to how we provide for budgets at the current time. But it's also telling us things have got to change. So to my mind this is the rationale for public service reform. We cannot stand still. Um our, you know, our services just now are really struggling across a range of different fronts. And yet I can talk to the record funding going to local government, which is good, but actually in terms of the systems and structures we have at the current time, are they meeting the needs of our constituents in the way they should? Probably not. Which is why public service reform offers us an opportunity to ensure that funding that the government has ring fence protected for local government gets to those who need it most. So I think the accounts commission critique is one that we would recognize. Um and that's exactly why we're driving forward our reforms in relation to to PSR. >> Thank you very much. Um so it sounds like you do accept the commission's kind of standing um of significant risk. Um is there any specifics you could tell us what the government will do in in this financial year to prevent you know their assessment happening and also while we're doing that reform how do we maintain the services that we need to provide on a day-to-day basis as well for the people at the end user. Well, um, in terms of this financial year, of course, we had the fiscal framework agreement between Scottish government and local government last October. That was a new feature of our engagement with local government. I think the predecessor committee welcomed that approach at the time and I think that's given helped to give clarity. We've also consolidated over2 billion pounds of funding into the core local government budget. That was an ask from local government. So, we've reflected on on that ask. We increased the overall funding for the fourth time in relation to uh the real terms increase being provided for. H and more broadly we baselined a number of commitments around about for example teacher pay deals and um I think there were commitments around about education as well in terms of child care Mr. story will correct if I'm wrong on that. >> Free school meals. Uh correct. And then there were other additional asks around about baselining of funding and the real living wage commitment was also met additionally. So there was significant additionality provided through the budget last year to recognize some of the challenges set out by the accounts commission particularly in relation to to social care. H and of course the government provided additionality to meet a number of other commitments not least in terms of the real living wage. Our approach to budget engagement this year will will follow a similar pattern. It will be informed of course by the settlement we received from the UK government but I would like us to continue in the space we got to last year because I think that was broadly welcomed by by Cosa actually and by the predecessor committee in terms of the engagement we had on the budget throughout that process and also reflecting some of the real challenges that um the members rightly raised in terms of social care. >> Thank you very much. And obviously there's a clear direction of travel. I think in relation to this the first minister has said that social care requires a single line of decision making, accountability and funding with the NHS taking the lead in that area. Um so what does the NHS taking the lead actually mean in practical terms again for the end user? >> So again we're at the start of a process on public service reform. I'm not going to prejudge the outcome of the engagement we will have with local government in that space. Um and in terms of I I think more broadly um Mr. Boner's question really is to how we can provide for budgets that are less confused than they currently are which actually can detract from the delivery of local services and this has been a key challenge and I think last Thursday the first minister answered a question I think from David Green who asked a question about the delivery of health services in his community and the first minister's response was to recount the kind of challenges that exist at the current time in relation to the structures we have with health boards which prevent us from making the improvements we would like to because of structures that pre-exist. So ultimately PSR is an opportunity for us to look again at the structures that exist. We've been pretty radical I should say in relation to our proposals on health. I accept that but actually that's because the the challenge is radical. So we need a radical response and we also need local government to be partners in this response. It's not just the NHS that will have a role to play here. So whilst the the government have been clear on that kind of lead responsibility role, we will need to engage significantly with Cosa in relation to social care and the next steps in that regard. We can't do it without them. So I'm not going to prejudge the outcome of that in relation to the roles of the NHS given that we're at the start of a process here and the roles of COA. But I'm more than happy to engage with the committee over the the course of the next three months as we get to that detail and hopefully as I I said I think in response to a previous question the shared position between Scottish government and local government on what comes next in relation to social care. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Um I'm going to briefly I think bring in Mark Griffin um who is joining us uh remotely today. I think I think we have some follow-up questions in relation relation to the role of IGBs. >> Yeah. Thanks Camir. Good morning cabinet secretary minister. I I just wanted to ask you know generally what are the plans what are the government's plans for um IGB's health and social care partnerships? You know the government's been very clear on um the direction of travel for NHS is talking about consultation about council reorganization but what do the government envisage happening with IGBs and health and social care partnerships? >> Well I think I thank Commissioner Griffin for his question. Um I think as has been previously set out the government in the program for government last Tuesday set out an approach which uh com well essentially confirms our intention to move from 14 territorial boards down to two strategic territorial health boards that will cover the east and the west of the country. Um beyond that of course those two new boards are going to be responsible for the planning and delivery of NHS services across the whole of Scotland with focus on in essentially ensuring that we get um the best representation in our local communities of services which are available particularly for rural and island communities. And so there is an opportunity in the three-month focus period with local government to look again at the role of IGBs. Um we're going into this work with a really open mind. The first minister was very clear about that last week. We don't have a destination at the end point of this three-month focus period because we have to come to that collaborative approach with local government. But in terms of the IGB structure at the current time, I gave the example of my own visit last week and I have heard from other health boards across the country in my time in the last three months in post about the challenges they face in terms of budgets at the current time where things are not working where things are not as integrated as they might be. So we haven't yet set preset that kind of approach to IGBs in that regard. But again that focused engagement with COA is going to help inform where we go next in relation to to social care but also where we go next in relation to budgets to the member's overall question. And I think having that clarity on next steps will be really important. We exist in a parliament of minorities. I'm happy to engage with the member and with the committee actually on how we deliver that to best improve the services in our local communities because we very much recognize I think to the point that was made by Steven Boner earlier on the financial challenges that exist at the current time in relation to the delivery of social care. >> Thank you. Mr. upon as well also um reflected on the first minister's view that reform of of social care should be healthled and I just wonder if if that in if that covered all aspects of what IGB's um do and in particularly I'm think about protective services and and other areas that perhaps the um a health model isn't quite as appropriate because there isn't the expertise um there those expertise lie firmly in the the local government sphere. And so I'm wondering if there's a bit more um work needs to be done in terms of um identifying specific streams that perhaps are more suitable to be health, but others that are I think are absolutely not. >> So I I think it is absolutely the case that more work needs to be undertaken in relation to public service reform. We've been really upfront about that. The overall approach is that health will will lead on these matters, but the member hits on an interesting point in relation to child protection where we have a level of integration. And the member will know from my own time in education um we spent a lot of time in the in the last three months of the last parliament very much focused on child protection issues which are not just about education they are about health as well they're about social work they're about integrated services so there are opportunities in the round to look at some of these matters uh particularly with local government where they have a level of responsibility and I think the member is quite right to point to child protection uh in terms of the responsibilities that's at local level we have been up front in that we expect health to lead on um these matters more generally, but undoubtedly there will continue to be conversations with Cosa around the margins of some of these issues because this is part ultimately of a negotiation. And again, it leads back to that three-month focus dialogue with Cosa who have some pretty strong views on these matters as a member will understand and I'm sure the first minister, Mr. McKe and I will hear more from Cosla on all of these matters on Friday when we meet. >> Thank you. Thank you, Comm. >> Thanks. Just for clarity, this uh term lead obviously one of the situations at present is there is local accountability through local authorities and health and social care partnerships and through that through IGBs. If two health boards are leading, where does accountability fit into that equation? >> Well, look, I think convenor we've talked in the round about public service reform today and I'm I'm not going to give you a definitive answer on these issues because they're part of a negotiation. The government has set out our approach to health care being that east and west focus. We have not done that in a local government space. We've done that quite deliberately so because we want to come to consensus with cos on these matters. We also have to arrive at consensus with parliament. So I'm not going to give you a specific answer on these points today convenor because they are part of a wider negotiation that we have to undertake not just with because with our trade union partners and also with parliament and if the committee has strong views on these matters um please feel free to to share them with me but also of course with Mr. Mickey who will be leading on our PSR work more broadly across government. >> You couldn't reach consensus with Cosa last time around in the national care service. If history repeats itself and you cannot reach consensus on social care reforms, what then happens? Does the government proceed on the basis of still transferring lead uh operating operational control to local authority to to health ports rather than local authorities. >> I'm an optimist convener. I'm absolutely certain that we'll be able to arrive at a consensus with Cosa because that's in the best interest of the people that we all represent. >> Well, we'll leave that to your powers of persuasion. I think Kate Campbell's got a very brief uh supplementary to that. I think >> I've been told it's very brief noted. Um uh yeah and again just to point to my register of interest as a former counselor. My experience of the IGB as a council I was never on the IGB but in nine years as a counselor my experience actually was it was quite disheartening when we would regularly see cuts made at the IGB level to preventative and early intervention services that you feel have a a really important kind of long-term impact on financial sustainability. But obviously IGBs I felt were under a lot of pressure to meet statutory and critical services and those decisions were taken. So >> I suppose my question is how does the government envisage being able to >> I don't want to say ring fence because that's not the word I'm looking for but to make sure that that priority around early intervention and prevention which is about the long-term financial sustainability is a really key part of any discussions going forward. So I think Miss Campbell hits on a really important point in relation to budgets and having that transparency actually and the the the tension that exists between currently our local authorities and NHS providers and our communities that actually is often to the detriment of our constituents. And so we have created structures that are not necessarily delivering in the ways that they were originally intended which is why PSR is is really necessary in terms of prevention. It's a key theme that runs through the program for government. So public service reform isn't just about saving money, which of course we have to deliver on in relation to the public purse. It is about building in a preventative approach. And I think that through changing our approach to budgets and a better aligning actually some of where we are between health and between local government, we will have a much more consistent and strategic approach to the issues that the member has raised today which are often quite challenging I think for local counselors um at local level to defend or to be able to I suppose explain to their constituents because of that tension that exists between different budgeting lines. So PSR is an opportunity to efficiently look at how we reform that process so that we can ensure we're driving a prevention agenda which at the current time is often pulled in different directions and I think it will allow us to build that into our budgeting processes at a far earlier stage to the benefit of our constituents. >> I I'll just supplement that. I think tension can can actually bring about real benefit if done in the right way and with the right uh mindset at heart because what we as society and citizens experience is that we don't experience life in silos. It's not, you know, education or health or transport or or social care. We're we're more complex than that. And you know, more information will come out as we progress in the next three months. But we as a government are trying to look at our budgeting process, trying to look at the PSR agenda and move away from this very vertical siloed approach into more of a of a of a bundled perspective and move to more of a horizontal integration because that is really what this is about is is looking at things in the round. looking at what uh national, regional, local could control, having discussions and then being able to say, well, what is it? Where does the decision making sit locally on this and how can you execute regionally? And being able to try and get away from that very siloed perspective that we've created over, you know, over many many years and creating a a lot of process and structure that is now habitual and actually just acting a sand within within the wheels on that one. So, it's it's a very good point, Miss Campbell. Thank you. I think we're going to move on to planning in a second, but just one specific question around non-domemestic rates whilst we are on local government. Um, obviously it was announced I think back in uh June that you'll be establishing a rapid review uh group on non-domemestic rates. What is the remit of that group and when can parliament expect it to report? >> Anded with committee this morning convenor. I'm about to receive advice from my officials, one of whom is sitting to my right later today, I think. So, I'm going to engage with officials on this in the coming days and once I've had that advice and taken a decision in relation to the appointment around about that wider review, I'd be more than happy to share the detail of that with committee. >> Okay. Obviously, this year there was the rates revaluation. >> Yeah. If that review group does find that there have been some systemic and anomalous re-evaluations, would it be the government's intention that they could retrospectively look at those revaluations with a view to remediating it in year rather than in future years? >> So I'm not clear convenor we be able to ameliate it in year although you will be aware that we have said and I was very clear in the statement about this in June that we are going to look at anomalies in the round. So that's already under consideration. I see Mr. story justiculating at me. So you may want to to comment on that point. >> So so I think the key the key part of the panel will be to identify the alleged anomalies that come forward. The rapid review does not replace the statutory appeals framework that is already in place. What we'd envisage is that the findings of the rapid review would help prioritize the appeals process. During the statutory appeals process, if evaluation is proved to be wrong for whatever reason, that is backdated to the 1st of April 2026 anyway. So the statute process will ensure it is delivered quick for the full revaluation period. What we would hope is that the review helps with the prioritization of those appeals processes. Some appeals can take quite a long time and this would allow us to prioritize those appeals. >> So for those businesses that are struggling paying what they think is, you know, egregious levels of rates prior based as opposed to what they were paying prior to this year, they could expect something to happen quite soon. >> We would hope so. If if if the evidence comes that there are anomalous valuations as say the statutory appeals process is not being replaced it will just be a prioritization exercise for that statutory appeals process. Okay fine we look forward to hearing more about the role in the remit and the time scale. I'd like to bring in uh Gary Bos I think may have some questions relating to prior issues and then to turn to planning. >> Yeah purely on again on non-domemestic rates. Sorry, I will obviously refer to Mr. Story on this. It's something that that I know minister's aware of that I'm very concerned about and that the tax income finance schemes we have in Scotland and there's a worry that the review might undermine or potentially undermine um one and and I'm going to refer particularly to the one in Falerk which has been very successful um which has produced jobs and and investment into the area. So will the review be considering the effects that it will be having on tax income finance schemes because they are they are important. >> I that would not currently be in the room of the rapid review but we've worked very closely with full cut council on a number of issues particularly around non-domemestic rights and if there are issues that are coming forward I would anticipate giving advice to DFM and miss goodlad as as they come forward but the rapid review will not be considering such matters. Okay. In that case, kind of is something maybe to pick up separately as is something that that is a big concern. You know, the programs have got gone. If you don't, happily to bring you out to Faulk and let you see them, but but please um it's something that's very very concerning for the people there. >> Okay. Happy to take that away and also more than happy to come and visit Falker at any point in the future. Mr. P. >> No problem. Sorry. Did you take the opportunity? Okay. So um we are now moving on to planning. Um again I suppose a bit part declaration I have been nine years on the planning committee uh in Faulk and I know there's obviously challenges in PL planning on time and it's been a frustration probably for for the councilors on the planning committees as well as other things. Um however I I think it's important that um when are the changes going to going to come through on planning to move it forward? What are they going to look like? Because obviously one of the biggest things in planning is the public's uh perception of their representation and and that will be a big change and also and probably most importantly and I'm sure you are not surprised going to get the next question. Um, are the Scottish government currently working on new planning policies, guidance, definitions, or procedures on proposed data centers? If so, can you outline these proposed changes? If not, can you explain why we're not looking at it? >> I think that's my mic on. Um, so several questions there. Uh, Gary, thank you. Um I've held uh a number of engagements over the summer uh with various uh uh various communities and also companies and businesses around planning and the clear the clear feedback is that folk are uh they they think the system has sand uh they think the system has uh some some things that we need to sort and get right. Um, but there's also clear feedback that that what we have within MPF4 um that was taken in in 2019 is working and that communities and businesses are are getting into the groove and getting into the system with that. So there's been very very resolute feedback as to not to create a new planning system uh and and have very much heard that from from all across the board. Look, what do I want to see within planning? I was I was very clear at the start on convenor's question about one of the the top three things that I want to see in the next year. I do want to see timing and the the planning uh time frames more standardized um and more brought into line across housing, major development, housing, business and industry because there's a vast degree of um separation within those time frames. I also think a second major uh reform within planning which we've already taken some uh taken some steps within within uh Fiona chief planners uh portfolio merging section 37 and 36 together to look at the energy system as a whole. Now this is something that we're we're we're going to be exploring further. Um but there's a growing consensus and frustration um across communities across developers that we're treating parts of this planning uh system as as individual parts. So whether it's generation, whether it's transmission or whether it's storage that each of these developments is being considered as a as an individual in our current planning system. Um but actually this is part of an energy system. So we've already taken some steps to to to aligning that under the chief planner and taking that into one team and certainly we'll be looking at regist uh we'll be looking at the um the uh uh regulations surrounding that as we go forward >> and and I appreciate that that there is planning committees out there just now that are actually looking at at this and and I'm talking about all over not an individual particularly doing that um and and I can see the potential for challenges um within planning officers and al also planning committees and one of the things that I would hope to see is that that some sort of training some sort of education will will help uh to move that forward and I don't know if there's any plans to to do that but if the chief planners rather than actually the minister probably um can can work with um the comm the committees and the the planners it would probably assist on where things are to to clarify a lot of things and make decisions have got to be made but they've got to be the right decisions and and that's that's always a concern. >> Do you know there's several things within my portfolio and planning is one of them and over the summer I've I've been able to engage with many uh on the planning side of things from from both side of that fence and I can clearly see if planning if we manage to get this right we're able to create spaces that really benefit our communities. Um, now I had engagement up at Aberine Council over the summer and I got to meet the planning team there. Excellent, really innovative work that puts planning at the heart of every decision that they're taking in terms of uh the spaces that they're creating for their communities. Excellent work. So much so that the Highlands Council and also the West Miles have requested that they share experience across um they've also got a digital system that allows a lot of that um paperwork and maybe more of that bureaucracy to be taken out and it enables the staff and the people and the planners to plan and to get that creative element into planning which is which is exactly what we need to see at the heart of communities. So I think that there's a lot of exciting uh progress that we could make within this planning uh reform and and and you know the first minister's been very clear that out of the the six sort of main agenda items and roundts right within the 100 days that planning was one of them. uh planning has a huge potential to create the kind of Scotland that we want and certainly in terms of experience sharing making sure that planners are able to plan and using digital uh digital solutions there's an opportunity to to take MPF4 take that national hub perspective and take it to the next level in terms of sharing best practice across >> so just just covering off again on the AI that essential thing so so are we are we willing to do additional guidance on Are we relying on MPF4? >> So data centers um look there's I I can sympathize with the concern that is across the country at this point in time. Uh the speed of data centers coming down the track is significant and the pace is quite unlike uh anything we've uh seen before. That's the nature of the tech. It's the nature of the beast in itself that requires a steady uh fully aware calm hand from government to be able to consider what's coming down the track. I think it's also important to say that in any business development in any sort of origination phase of a new industry you get a vast array of applications or of that development stage in and then as you move forward into the capital into the capex into the operation and the execution that derisks and you also see the number decline. So I think it's important to re to give and provide reassurance that uh you know 24 uh data centers within the pipeline. I I I very much uh doubt that 24 will get built. So that's important to state that's the same in any industry as you as you work your way through. The second point I would make is that how often do we actually get the chance to step back and see a new industry come to Scotland to be there at the start of it to make sure that we get this right in terms of communities that are hosting it in terms of the regulation that's required in terms of the planning procedure that's put around this to uh to safeguard and protect and but also to capture the opportunity. There's very few opportunities that you get to shape things from the start. So that that's an important point to make. Um Scotland needs to be able to capture the upside and the benefit from from data centers, but we need to make sure that the right data centers are in place in the right location with the right energy source and with the right regulations behind them. Um we've been very clear in terms of trying to wrap around wrap our arms around this as we see uh the pace increasing uh over the summer. We've issued new guidance on this in terms of uh requesting ministers to be notified if it's over 50 megawatts, calling a couple in and requiring uh e EIA um environmental impact assessments on a couple as well. We hear the concern in terms of requiring that EIA assessment across. That's something that we're giving consideration to. I also can hear the concern in terms of the definition of the green data center perspective in terms of looking at that EIA assessment in terms of the energy uh the energy provision and tie into the grid and also the district heating is there a possibility to ring fence and to be able to create regulation. It's at the front of my mind and the front of the agenda, but I need to make sure that I get this right. Um because as I said, this is a major opportunity to shape this right from the start and I'm going to measure twice and cut once. >> Thank you, Minister. I'm sure the committee would would all support and do we would all want to help out if there's anything we can do. >> Thank you. I'm going to bring in uh Mark Griffin again who is joining us uh remotely. >> Yeah. Thanks, Camir. Good morning again, Minister. I just wanted to ask about the the progress of local development plan adoption and wonder if Miss Goodlad can set out when the government expects to see um all 34 planning authorities adopt their new local development plans. So I think local development plans are a really important way to to to democratize our planning and to to do exactly as what I was suggesting to to Gary Boss in terms of enabling planners to create spaces that development uh and put at the heart of uh communities. Um I was at a conference uh two months ago where I met many of the local development plan leads. Um and this is something that we're now progressing uh forward as we take this through the next couple of months. It would be remiss of me to to stand here and give a date as to when we see that to be in place. But certainly local development plans, local development officers and leads I think actually play a very important role in terms of as we look forward to local democracy, what local government will look like and also the execution of public sector reform. this is already a a readymade solution in terms of our heart of our local authorities linking it up to a government level. I think it's an important vehicle to be considering as we look forward on on PSR. >> When the government produced um documents earlier this year that set out when they expected um authorities to hit the the adoption of local development plans by May 2028. those who weren't planning to hit it by May 2028 and um the the the age of the existing plan. So I mean has has that changed the the government now have no idea of when um local development plans expect to be adopted then? >> Uh no not at all. Uh it's it's the for every local authority to be able to take that forward Mark but I'm going to pass on to Gary who will have a very concise detailed answer for you. detailed. Okay, I should do that. So, um I agree that the government had previously set the target of can we have all the the local development plans in place uh by May 2028, which was 5 years on from the the new LDP system coming into play. We've also asked authorities every six months to give us an update on um how they're getting along with that. The next update is due at the end of this month. So um our our data won't be bang up to date right at the moment. We know there had been quite a number of the the um LDPs were slipping beyond that date previously. So on that basis we have engaged um with planning authorities with the the LDP leads at the authorities and also with the support of the national planning improvement champion um to do some work on very specific aspects of the LDP process um to see what we can do just to to move things along and one um perfect example of that was that the the first phase of the process was for authorities to produce evidence reports and to go through a gate check. we were finding by around this time last year um quite a number of those were not getting through the gate check at the first point. So we we um convened a summit um produced further guidance on the back of that and pleased to say that certainly every um evidence report that's gone to the gate since that point has has passed so we're seeing good progress. I hope that's helpful. >> Okay. So what what is the average age of the currently adopted local development plans to the government and have a record of that? >> Um I'm not sure I could nail it as a an average but it does fluctuate over I would say certainly over 10 years down to the most recent are just a year or two old. I mean the reason to ask that I mean going from some being um 10 year plus um not expecting an adoption date until May 2020 or or beyond and the change between NPF3 and NPF4 which reduced that um which removed the the policy um which almost had that pressure release where um if all um allocated land or um certainly buildable allocated land had been used up. There was a pressure released system to um allow for maybe speculative applications to um to build more houses. So I just wonder given the the expected adoption date the the average or or the range of ages of current local development plans whether that is now becoming a an issue that's affecting um effective housing land supply. >> So I would maybe come at that with with a couple of points. Um first of all um the importance of us having a planled planning system can help with investment choices um right across the board. So it's important that we we do maintain that but the planning system also has an inbuilt flexibility that will allow the the decision makers in the vast majority of cases it is the local authorities um to consider both the development plan but also anything else that may be changing in the area to to help uh shape the the decisions that they might make. And to bring that round to specifically on the the housing allocations, we did issue a notification direction last year to get a handle on applications that are coming forward for housing on sites that are not allocated in the the current local development plans to see what's happening um with them and just to to keep an eye on what the decision- making is doing and seeing if that flexibility is coming into play. And the evidence we're seeing from that, I can't give you an exact figure right now, but it was certainly around three quarters of those applications for housing on non-allocated sites were actually being approved by the planning authorities. So, there is a sign that there's a recognition um where there may be issues with um the existing allocated supply that that planning permission can still be granted. And and finally, the reason I'm I'm going down this line of question is because um a year ago, the Scottish government um announced their housing emergency um action plan and within that that included a target to increase all 10ear housing supply 10% year on year for the next 3 years. And so I just wanted to know which um what kind of crossover work had been um happening within um the planning director of government and also the the housing directorate really to to make sure that 10% yearon-year increase on tenure housing in the context of a housing emergency was happening. >> Yeah, I so I'm meeting with uh the cabinet secretary on this uh next week or the week after. Uh so I'll be very happy to write to you uh Mr. Griffin in terms of uh what what I can share from that meeting. It's important that we have that cross uh portfolio. You'll you'll imagine and you'll understand that having had this brief all but 3 months ago, I haven't managed to have that meeting yet, but it is happening uh towards the end of September. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> Thank you. But before I bring another just tangential to that discussion around local development plans, the planning legislation requires the Scottish government to lodge a review of local place plans with parliament as as soon as is practicable after the 25th of July. When can we expect to see that review? Uh deputy first minister. >> Uh well, I will defer to Andy on these matters um in relation to planning. >> Yeah, so the the the period for that just started in July. Um we have the work underway. We have sort of people in my team that are um starting to to do the work on that. At the moment, I don't have a an exact timetable for when we will see it, but we're working up our engagement plan at the moment to get that on. >> And what specifically is that review looking at? >> Um it's looking at um the the uptake of local police plans, what influence they may be having within the planning system. there's a very specific um role built into the the legislation for local police plans for how um they can have an influence on the local development plans that are coming through. So it's really important that we can we can get a handle on just not just how many there are but what they're actually doing in practice on the ground. >> Yeah. I mean obviously I mean community councils for example have been very very very engaged. Some have, some haven't. But to give you an practical example, Moffett Community Council put a huge amount of effort into their local place plan and feels like it's just disappeared in into the ether. The program, the program for government, deputy first minister says that uh the government wants to strengthen community level governance and engagement. This is an example perhaps where it isn't absolutely working. So what does what does that commitment to local um engagement for example with community councils mean both in the planning system for example and and and everything else through the program for government? >> Well look I think we we've been very clear we want to strengthen that community engagement particularly in relation to planning as you've heard from the minister uh who who leads on planning. Um I think there there is an opportunity for us to reflect on this through the evidence session today and if you if I may convenor we'll come back to the committee on some of these issues more substantively through that PSR engagement and and ultimately actually how we can reflect on how we can strengthen that opportunity for local communities to be better engaged in the process and we will all have constituency examples where that has not been the case. >> Yeah. Yeah. Well, I think that that that particular example from MOA, I think, is is quite telling because they're saying all that effort and then they've seen nothing come back in return in terms of the way the planning system or the local development plan appears to be operating. So, I think moving forward, learning those lessons would be would be good. With that, I'll bring in Steve Bonner. >> Thanks very much. >> Uh, can we So, I just want to kind of go back a step to the kind of planning reforms if that's okay. um in terms of to find out if it's a lack of planning capacity and uh the qualified staff and resource local authorities. Now is a long time to have sat on a council over 10 years but back then capacity resource was was an issue for for local authorities in terms of implementation of the community empowerment act and indeed an implementation uh of uh planning. So I just want to one question is is the problem the rules as they stand or the resources what we have available to operate the rules currently. >> So it's both as you would expect uh Mr. Bonner it's uh I've had several meetings this summer with uh various planning uh authorities v various local authorities as well. There's definitely a lack of planners that are coming through the system. That's for sure. um in terms of the capacity uh that we have available to us and there's challenges within that in terms of the private sector uh being able to take some very very good planners uh that have been planned uh and and developed and coached and nurtured at a local level and then there's different conditions that are being offered within the private sector. So we're seeing we're seeing that sort of uh that poach happening. Um there's also uh in terms of the the capacity the uh the sand in the wheels that I was discussing in terms of the amount of bureaucracy and paperwork that is existing within the planning system. Um so that is enabling as I was uh talking to to Mr. about trying to get planners to be able to look at that capability function to get back to be able to be planners and I think there's some uh going to the AI space there's some AI and digital tools that I would really like to explore to enable planners to be able to do that creative town center planning place planning that enables us to get the best out of uh community buildup and to be able to take some of that digitization and that workload um to be able to free up uh planners to be planners >> sorry forgive me undertaken a lot of work internally to grow the number of planners that we have which Andy I think may want to say a little more on >> yeah it's it's sort of good to bring this in um so I may sound biased but it would be great to see more planners coming into the the system in Scotland um the Scottish government has so in recent times we have um recruited a cohort of future planners so these are graduates who are working with the um the the Scottish government while doing their postgrad and planning at the moment ready to um go out into the into the world. We also trebled the number of burseries um from 10 to 30 over the last couple of years to get uh more planners or more people studying planning to to just try and kind of boost that that cohort that we have right across the country. It's quite a small world planning in Scotland and um yeah it certainly would be sort of good opportunity to get more people in. Another thing that we've been doing sort of in the meantime though that can help in the short term is starting the national planning hub which is um providing an extra resource um funded through the Scottish government for planning authorities uh both to help with a bit of skills development including some of the support that they've given some authorities on um on the data centers that we're dealing with at the moment but also kind of targeting kind of specific um h funding for additional staff to come commend on short terms to certain targets um where it's needed most within the planning authorities. >> Promising. Thank you. Thank you. I think Thomas G has some questions on the back of other planning issues we discussed. >> Um also before the election, the government consulted on measures to reduce the time and cost of the planning system for theme home builders. Um both the deputy first minister and the min the planning minister will know thatmemesmemes rely on the local supply chains invest in local people and are critical to delivering homes in their constituencies in rural areas and on brownfield sites. Now on their knees and planning delays costing them time and leaving their equity tied up. When canmemes expect to hear proposals to reform and accelerate the planning system for Scotland's local home builders? So just like the time frame on AI data centers, it would be remiss of me to stand here today and and and make a rod for my back in terms of in terms of a date, but I have met with some of these over the the course of the summer. It's important to say that 99% of all applications that go through the system do get approved at local level. As I said at the beginning to the convenor, I really do want to see that discrepancy in terms of um in terms of house building, in terms of small house building, in terms of large house building plans, industry and business to be able to have a more standardized time because time is money. And you're right, as as you're sitting on on on uh on projects that are taking months, if not quarters in delay, you then see that impact on your bottom line. So it's something that I want to see change and something that I'm you know really making sure that my team and my officials are engaging with the sector to understand in terms of the solutions that they want to see uh to be able to bring in uh the reforms and the changes that are needed notwithstanding to actually overturn the whole system but to make the improvements on the case by case proportionality that we need to see but you'll you'll uh agree with me that I'm not going to sit here and make it for my own back in terms of months and dates >> and I I know to many plans many developers in particular across the country hearing that there's not going to be any more legislation changes will be quite good and come as a degree of comfort because I think they were slightly concerned when the program government was announced last week that that could be the case. So having that on the record will be very very reassuring to many of them and who just want to go on and build in more homes. The last question I have is around um the cabinet secretary launched a further consultation on the building safety levy over the summer um and it published its planned rates. Now, homebuilders who have been in contact with me have since said that they are seriously concerned that the levy will leave many projects unviable and too costly to build. Um, this will send the tax base of private homes spiraling and it will threaten the afford affordable homes that are funded by private development and worsen the housing emergency. Can I ask is is the deputy first minister prepared to accept a tax that will see fewer homes delivered um and your tax base narrowed further or can she commit to a viability relief that takes a more sensible approach in a transational transitional arrangement that delay the tax until the tax base and all tenure housing is completed for grown. >> I think the overall point we need more homes to be built. So we don't want to put um barriers in the way to that progress and of course the government has signific invested significant amounts of additional funding in the last financial year to grow further our base in that regard. Um in terms of the consultation itself, it was launched on the back of agreement reached in the previous parliament. Um so that was already kind of agreed to in the last parliament and of course we're in the consultation period. So it would be remiss of me to provide commentary on that at the current time, but I'm more than happy to engage with the committee following the results of the consultation on the next steps and how we can support the sector to build more homes. >> Perfect. Thank you. >> Just in relation to that, obviously there is a commitment to look at heat and building standards again within within this parliament. Speaking to developers, one of their concerns and speaking to housing association, one of their concerns is simply the cost of construction. >> So in common with for example the building safety levy, what more can you do? obviously uh sitting at the central government except first minister given this cuts across government to ensure that developers and both public and private sector developers aren't impeded for building more homes therefore hitting your housing targets by the costs that government is putting upon it. I think we need to look in the round and I don't want to prejudge the outcome of the budget agreement obviously convenor because that will be contingent on the the settlement from the UK government but we do need to be cognizant of the additional costs that are bearing down on um house builders at the current time not least in terms of inflationary costs which is driving up building cost across across the market. So we will consider all of these things in the round and I will do that particularly through engagement with cabinet secretaries not least the cabinet secretary for housing who I think will be in front of the committee next week ahead of the budget in that regard. Super. And with that, I think Keith Campbell's got a number of questions across probably most of the issues that we've touched on today. >> I don't know if I've got that many questions. Um, just actually on that point, um, I suppose one of the challenges is obviously the cost of of building since Brexit actually largely, but other factors as well have come in. >> Um, has gone up and obviously we need more homes, but also one of the big challenges we face is energy security. And one of the ways you deal with energy is by bringing down the cost of heating and we do that by having more energy efficient buildings. So I think it's a really big challenge and there's not an easy answer. So I suppose I'm just putting that on the record. So there's a number of views um from the committee. I don't know if you want to respond to that deputy press minister. >> I mean I would agree with the the challenge and and you know at a time when our energy security is h being stretched we have to look at alternative approaches. I was actually in my constituency um in the summer recess visiting a number of homes that had received funding from Scottish government to help transform them into energy efficient homes and it was amazing the impact that that's funding has had in relation to triple glazing, insulation, heat pumps being installed to bring bills right down for families and that was in a small housing development owned by a housing association in Glenn Rother. So it's a small example of ways in which central government investment can help to bring down the cost of heating your own home. Um, so there are lots of different examples of that across government. That's an example from from housing, but there are ways and means in which we can help support households to save money on their bills and we know it's going to be a really challenging winter period with bills set to increase again um in the coming months. So we'll continue to look at those alternatives and I suppose as I said to the convenor, I'll be very mindful and sympathetic of these points in budget negotiations with my cabinet colleagues h in the coming weeks. >> Okay. Thank you. Um I wanted to uh circle back to uh data centers. So um you mentioned minister that you thought that they needed to be in the right place in the right time but you weren't um exactly specific and whether or not you think there needs to be a national strategy or national guidance that does look at the location, the size and also the energy source. Is that something that you are considering? So given that this is nationally important infrastructure and given that planning is devolved to Scotland, this spans across several different portfolios across this government. Um I can see that this will not be solved within my own portfolio or within the energy portfolio or the economy portfolio or indeed the technology one. This is something that is having to have everyone together to be able to make sure that we have the right energy use, the right placement, the right type of AI data center as well. Um the right type of offtake, the right site, are we linking it into district heating, the right location, the right um connectivity and proximity to the grid. You know, these are all things that we need to be considering and and certainly this is something that I have uh now taken uh initiative on to be able to we have the AI data strategy. It's a couple of years uh in place now and as I said this is moving rapidly. It's not just moving rapidly in Scotland but it's moving rapidly right across Europe and and of course across the United States and indeed China. Um so we have the AI data center the AI strategy at a Scottish government level and that's a very good foundation on which to build but the pace of change even within the last 12 to 18 months is astronomical. So last week I took the initiative to be able to bring my colleagues together on this and it is something that we need to as I said the energy side the technology side what type of companies how do we create this right and create this right from the beginning I you know I I am very sympathetic to the calls um of a moratorum I am sympathetic to the immediiacy that people want to see on a solution on this but immediate solutions do not get it right long term it kicks the can down the road and it's about measuring twice, cutting once, as my granddad used to tell me. You do it and you do it with an urgency, which we are tackling, but it's about it's about making sure that we get this right for the long term because this is this is going nowhere. We need to make sure that that we as Scotland are are open to AI, but the right type of tech for our communities, for our place, and for our energy use. >> Okay. So in terms of a national strategy or guidance, is that something that you are considering? >> Again, I'll go back to Simon SK in terms of the golden circle. I want to start with the why. Why do we need to get this right? And and and then we'll look at the what and the how. And that's about taking my colleagues and I around the table together along with our officials, along with being able to get experts uh into this. That process is underway. So I'm not going to to sit here and and talk about the the sort of national end point as to where that will go but it's absolutely uh top of agenda and you can see the strength of feeling around the country on this as well. Um and is again back to the role of government to see these strengths of feeling and to be able to act pragmatically and calm and be able to take the best uh the best approach for our our communities and our people. That's helpful and it's reassuring to know that you're bringing because it it is something that sits across so many different areas in government. So bringing people together. >> I think just to build on that to assure committee there was a substantive cabinet discussion on these issues during the summer recess which informs some of the changes the minister announced during the summer recess and there will be further engagement on a cross portfolio basis as the minister spoke to um in that regard to inform next steps. And just uh finally on that, so in Ireland last year, 22% of their electricity was used on data centers and there's estimates that that put up household bills by about 360 um euros. And obviously the concern with that is that if you are taking energy off the grid for data centers, you're then having to burn fossil fuels to replace them, which is the increasing cost. Obviously, there's environmental challenges there as well. um we are somewhat in the hands of the UK government because we're waiting for um NISO to come forward with the strategic plans, energy plans um and the grid is incredibly important. But can we get assurances that that kind of energy planning will be something that's very much considered at the heart of this and if there were to be national guidance coming forward that that's something that could be considered. >> Yeah. So thank you for the question on that Kate. It's it's as you say grid is reserved and it's important that we are able to work with our our UK government colleagues on this to be able to get the right uh planning uh across Scotland. Indeed, electricity doesn't get consumed where it's generated. And we see the we see the constraint within our own uh renewable system um across hydro, onshore solar, onshore wind in terms of Scotland over the last decade with a back-to-front approach from the UK government in terms of building out uh generation first and not transmission. So we've already seen the the backto-front approach on on renewables and we need to make sure that anything new coming down the tracks also doesn't incur that. I've been looking at Ireland with some interest uh because clearly there's uh you know especially over the last six months to 12 you've seen that 22% rise as you say that gives me concern and it gives me that greater um impetus to be able to make sure that we um alongside the UK government that we're starting to discuss these these matters. Um, I'm very clear that AI data centers will not and should not push up the cost of communities uh across Scotland. Um, we've already seen that within our renewable system and indeed uh unfortunate choices from the UK government in terms of decoupling gas from electricity, not done yet. and also not introducing regional pricing has has left a system where those in the highlands and islands in my community we've got the highest energy poverty and and yet we host the largest onshore wind farm almost in the whole of Europe Viking energy so let us not make the same mistakes when it comes to to data centers and I think there's a couple of technological things that could be considered uh in the round there there could be private connection um there could also be uh trying to use data centers as a as a sort of stress strain response to the grid when it is in times of curtailment. Um there's also some interesting uh guidelines or exploration coming out from offgen right now. They're consulting on actually um proposing a fee for direct connection within this grid system for specifically on data centers between 250,000 and 700,000 per megawatt. So that's quite excit quite interesting to follow that uh with interest as it progresses along. Clearly data centers are something that we need in order to be able to uh digitize many parts of our society from health to uh universities to tech to innovation uh to invention and also potentially on public sector reform. But we need to get this right for Scotland and certainly a homegrown solution is one that I would prefer as opposed to taking a a solution from from elsewhere because we have a very unique set of circumstances here which we shouldn't forget is why the data centers are knocking in the first place. >> Thank you Minister that was a very helpful and actually reassuring response. So I do appreciate that. Um finally just skipping back to um actually the sluck review and just whether or not there government is planning on doing any kind of evaluation to see if there has been an impact in terms of um counselor improvements in pay for counselors. whether or not we've seen that open up the opportunity for people with caring responsibilities, people who maybe come from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds, if we're seeing an increase in diversity, um, and I suppose our communities being better reflected in local government because of that or if we're planning to do any research or understanding evaluation of that. >> So, we haven't yet undertaken evaluation because of course we've not yet had another round of local government elections. So I suppose the optimal point for us to consider that in conjunction with Cosa will be following local government elections next May and we'll continue to take that forward in terms of monitoring that diversity and encouraging uh you know different communities actually to stand for local elections in the first place and we hope that our support for that those recommendations in relation to counselor pay will help to increase the diversity that we see in local government. >> Thank you. >> Good. Thank you Kate. Um deputy first ministers just before we close just want to go back to the finances uh for local government and IGBs as you obviously consider um the budget the the accounts commission say councils face a 529 million pound gap this year and the committee papers identify a475 million pound gap in IGB finances ordinarily at this stage in the financial year if the government did have for one for better expression some loose change hanging around um beneficiaries beneficiaries were often councils or IGBs through health boards which would help them if they were in a state of distress towards the end of the financial year. >> Next year you're facing a 7 700 million pound negative tax reconciliation which it would be prudent if there was uh some unspent uh funds to perhaps roll that forward to the Scotland Reserve to what could be a challenging year next year. I think as as as you've um identified a lot of this comes down to tax planning and tax uh policy. So so in two parts in terms of local authorities raising revenues the program for government identifies obviously uh the capacity for um revaluation and uh new rates at the um upper end. It also talks of flexibility for local authorities to raise more funds. Now they may be forced to do that out of necessity but at the same time we may argue this in the course of this session with the accounts commission and the um Scottish fiscal commission challenging the 2% uh real terms increase figure. Are we to expect that council taxpayers uh are and potentially businesses are going to have to pay more to make up for what I think are now quite clear real terms reductions in council budgets this year and in future years in this parliament. >> So I certainly don't want that to be the case convenor and actually if you look at council tax payments in Scotland they remain significantly lower than in other parts of the United Kingdom. I go back to some of my comments I made at the the start of the session that despite a very challenging financial settlement from the UK government this year, we were again for the fourth year in a row able to uplift the funding to local government in real terms to 15.7 billion pounds which is significant and within that of course we provided for a level of flexibilities that I documented earlier on. H you you talked about some of the flexibilities there uh particularly around about opportunities to raise revenue. We'll engage with local government as we normally would through engagement ahead of the budget. Um and there are strong views from local government around about their settlement which I I I welcome and I think it's important we listen to the challenge there. Ultimately though we do need to reflect on the level of services being provided currently and that's actually why public service reform is inherently tied to budget. These two things link directly. So um I need Mr. McKe to deliver on our public service aspirations if we are also going to deliver on balancing the budget. So we we need to have these two things working in tandem. I think the targeted three-month period for engagement with local government and all of these matters is hugely important because it does of course dovetail to the budget and hopefully helps to focus minds in that regard too. So there are opportunities for local government here to gain from further devolution of powers. We've talked about some of that today. I'm not going to specify where we get to at the end point of that three-month discussion. But I very much look forward to further engagement with committee but also with Cosa in that regard so that we can at the end of this three-month focus period reach that shared consensus of what comes next for local government. And I agree with your your overall view comma which is that we need to protect local budgets. We need to protect the services that our constituents rely on. And I absolutely commit to working with Cosa to ensure that's exactly what we deliver on. And just finally in relation to that 700 million pound negative tax reconciliation over the summer and this is focusing on your the finance aspect of your role. >> Um we have seen some quite significant um developments in relation to tax policy in relation to returns and projections that 700 million pounds will hit the bottom line next year. What does it say to uh taxpayers and to this parliament that you since you've come into this role you've chosen to scrap the government's tax advisory group which would surely help you stop making the kind of mistakes that are leading to that negative reconciliation. >> So the decision to um end the tax advisory group I think was taken by my predecessor um some months before parliament dissolved. Um but we have committed to a further tax conference which I think is taking place next week in Glasgow and I will be speaking at. So there will be further engagement throughout this process. I know convenor will not agree on the government's approach to taxation. But I would put on record that the government's approach to taxation which is progressive has allowed us to raise an extra 1.8 billion pounds in funding which we put into our public services. We put into more generous pay deals. It's allowed us actually significant additionality to run the country. And I'm sure though we will continue to engage on these matters ahead of the the budget. We are of the view as a government that folk who earn more should pay a little bit more so that the rest of society can benefit. And that's a principle I'm very proud to stand by. >> Thank you, Deputy First. I'm sure the finance committee probably will take a further discussion with that. >> I suspect they may well. >> Can I therefore just thank both you and Mr. Goodlad for uh your time and we look forward to seeing you regularly as part of the uh committee meeting. Thank you very much indeed. >> I think we'll now just briefly suspend until we allow a change at the top table as it were. Thank you. Thank you. And after that brief uh interlude um we turn to agenda item three which is consideration of an affir affirmative statutory instrument namely the visitor levy miscellaneous amendment Scotland regulations 2026 draft and I welcome back the minister for public finance and also welcome her officials from the Scottish government Fiona Campbell the visttor levy and cruise ship levy team leader and Susan Rob who's a Scottish government solicitor. Thank you all for joining us today. Following the evidence session, the committee will be invited under the next agenda item to consider a motion to uh approve this affirmative instrument. And I remind everyone that the Scottish government officials can speak under this item, but not during any debate uh that follows uh the motion. So I now therefore invite uh Miss Goodlad to make some opening remarks on the SSI before us today. >> Thank you, Convenor. So, I will only make a few opening remarks given that we've already actually had quite a a long session. Um, and I want to ensure that there's there's appropriate time for questions. The new regulations are technical um uh and make amendments to the visitor levy providing clarity but without changing the underlying policy. The amendments do not impose any new administrative burdens on accommodation providers. They provide clarity on how penalties and interests may apply and where a local authority has made an assessment on the amount of levy due. They also make some drafting amendments highlighted by the DPLRC when it considered the visitor uh levy authority assessment regulations and laid in draft. The regulations also amend the first tier tribunal for Scotland's local taxation chamber to provide drafting clarity in regards to references to the 24 act making clear where the visitor levy act is referred to within that instrument. So I'm I'm happy to take any questions from members uh and to to take some of the technicalities around this. I also have my my officials with me. >> Fine. Thank you. Before I I bring in any uh other committee members who who may have questions, just one question in light of the fact that the levy is now up up and running, are we seeing any significant signs of of non-payment uh that this um SSI would obviously help uh remedy? >> So, this is something that has been introduced in Edinburgh uh as of I think it was June this year, June or July. Um it's very new. there are other uh authorities across Scotland that are considering it for 2027, but as of yet this is a precautionary uh measure that we're taking in because as as of yet we are really only a couple of months into this um and so therefore um I can see I can see my officials have come back in on this but as of yet um we're still very much monitoring. >> Mr. M Campbell. >> Thanks Minister. Um the levy act specifies that returns should be made and generally local authorities have applied quarterly tying in with the financial year quarters. So the first returns won't be made in Edinburgh until October this year covering from 24th of July when Edinburgh went live. So July, August, September. And it'll only be after October when the first returns are submitted that we will see if there is any non-payment. But we're we're not expecting that. You would assume most accommodation providers will comply with the legislation requirements. >> And anecdotally, obviously Edinburgh is pursuing a percentage fee. The legislation was amended in the closing days of last parliament to allow for a flat fee. Is there any ane any anecdotal evidence to suggest that where there could be non-compliance? It is down to people just taking some time to learn the ropes of the system potentially. >> I think that's a fair point. It it very much could be. We're we're we're within sort of a a five to six week period now in terms of seeing this come in. I think that will have to be considered in the round convenor to understand if there's a deliberate uh malice in avoiding um or if it's just an oversight of a new regulation being brought in given the complexities that this is entirely on room rates uh transport uh meals uh all the additionals cannot be considered within this. So let's give it time to to bed in and see and and of course there's um uh there's other authorities that are considering this but considering the flat fee. So Arg and Highland they're considering a5 pound um administration on a room per night or two pound uh from from our guy and but so let's see let's see where this goes. >> Fine with that any other committee members have any questions or comments? No. Okay. So I then therefore move us to agenda item four which is the formal consideration of the motion SM S7M 00407 that the social justice housing and local government committee recommends that the visitor levy miscellaneous amendment Scotland regulations 2026 be approved. I invite the minister to perhaps speak to or just move the motion. >> I'll move the motion. >> Any uh further uh comments or contributions from members in respect of that during the debate? Uh therefore uh I think uh we can proceed and the question is that motion SM7M 00407 in the name of Jenny Guth be agreed to. Are we all agreed? >> We're all agreed. Therefore I thank you minister for your second appearance before us and we'll let you go on with the rest of your day. Our members now therefore content to delegate responsibility to me to approve a short factual report to the parliament on the affirmative instrument. I think we are >> therefore and thank you minister. You can now get on with your day. Thank you. >> I now propose to move the committee to private session.