COUNCILS are facing a funding freeze until 2026/27, according to indicative plans set out by the Scottish Government.
The spending review outlined on Tuesday by Finance Minister Kate Forbes has set out indicative plans for the remainder of this parliamentary term.
Projected spending for local government is at £10.6 billion each year from 2022/23 to 2025/26, and £10.7bn in 2026/27.
Labour MSP Mark Griffin has said the funds would see about £900 million of real cuts stripped away from councils by the end of the parliamentary term.
He said: “The Cabinet Secretary’s claims of a new deal for local government, in fact, sounds the death knell for local government as we know it.
“Today’s review plans a further £900m of real cuts by 2026/27 on top of a decade of cuts that has libraries closing, roads crumbling and bins overflowing.
“Does the Cabinet Secretary not accept that there is nothing more to cut from local government – that the grinding down of local government and services is what has gotten us into this mess and it won’t get us back out of it?”
READ MORE: Scottish Government allocates £20 million for independence referendum in 2023
But Forbes said the Scottish Government had treated local authorities “fairly” while giving them as much “clarity” as possible over the spending reviews.
Liberal Democrat MSP Liam McArthur also hit out at the plans for a National Care Service – included in £73.1bn investment for health and social care.
He said: “It has barely been three weeks since the elections where the SNP and Greens told voters about their commitment to local government.
“We now see what those promises were worth. Cash for local authorities is effectively frozen for the remainder of this parliament, meaning real terms cuts to local services.
“The Government intends to spend countless millions stripping powers from local authorities to create an expensive centralised national care service.
“If the UK Government treated the Scottish Government in this way can the Cabinet Secretary advise local authorities what the appropriate response would be?”
Forbes told McArthur that one of the primary reasons for setting out a spending review was to give local authorities “clarity” going forward within the spending parameters.
She said: “I’ve said it already, I’ll say it again. This is not a budget.
“I can only spend what is allocated to me by the UK Government in light of a 5.2% cut between last year and this year and an outlook where inflation is eating into our spending power, we have treated local government fairly.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel