Chamber and committees

I notice there are huge differences. Catering is mentioned in our report, with some authorities saying spend took up 6 per cent of the grant, whereas others said that it was zero. I cannot quite understand that from the papers.

That will have an impact on future maintenance of the buildings in question and everything else.

I guess that, in capital terms, any extra money that local authorities spend will have to be taken from somewhere else.

On the desire to have a national rate, does there not need to be regional variations? If I compare Edinburgh with Elgin, for example, is it not the case that property, building costs and maybe even staff costs are more expensive in Edinburgh? If there was a national rate, how would we be able to square that off?

Maybe there should be a minimum rate, which might be higher in other areas.

Thank you for being so generous, Presiding Officer.

Non-domestic rates continue to be one of the biggest issues for our local authorities, especially in the north-east of Scotland. I have met many local businesses, to speak to them in order to understand the issues that they face.

As my colleagues have mentioned, the Scottish Conservatives are supportive of the bill in its mirroring of what has happened in the rest of the UK. It is a sensible measure to update the non-domestic rates appeals system. However, I feel that much wider reform is needed. We will continue to press the Scottish Government to meet business leaders to discuss the further reforms that are required.?

Although the bill is welcome, it falls short of providing the help that thousands of businesses need, due to the failed system. During the debate in April, I pointed out that, in 2017, businesses in the north-east of Scotland faced huge increases in their rates bills when the valuation was assessed at the peak of oil and gas activity, only for new bills to arrive just as the sector faced one of its biggest slumps. The courts ruled that there had been no material change in circumstance and that businesses would have to wait for the revaluation to take place. Then that was delayed by a year because of Covid, despite calls from many business leaders for the revaluation date to be brought forward. As the minister pointed out, revaluation was the time for the market to be fixed. The delay was so disappointing for the businesses that were waiting. We continue to have a situation in which the non-domestic rates income from businesses in Aberdeen is greater than that from businesses in Edinburgh—a city with twice its population. Many businesses in the north-east simply cannot believe that that is the case.

The Scottish Fiscal Commission forecasts that were released last month gave worrying news to businesses up and down Scotland. They showed that non-domestic rates income was set to increase by 30 per cent over the next five years, from £2.7 billion to £3.6 billion, at a time when growth will be minimal, which left many people wondering where the extra £900 million will come from.

The forecast also showed that some businesses last year voluntarily handed back Covid business rates relief funds to the tune of £126 million. That was the right thing to do for places such as Asda, Sainsbury’s and Boots, whose income seems to have increased. Some may have thought that that cash would go to local authorities to help struggling businesses on the high streets or that it could have been used to plug some of the non-domestic rates overdraft, but no—instead, the devolved Scottish National Party Government used it simply to plug other holes in its budget. Those were business rate support funds and should have been used just for that purpose.

I welcome the contributions from members from across the chamber. First, I agree with Miles Briggs in sending the cabinet secretary my best wishes for what I am sure will be a busy and joyful summer. Miles Briggs also mentioned that the right to appeal has not been removed. Of course, we welcome that. He also mentioned support. For me, that just masks a failing system.

The issue of town centres was mentioned by Miles Briggs and by Alex Rowley. Town centres have faced difficulties over the past few years, and we have an opportunity to fix some of those things with a new system. Miles Briggs also asked for greater transparency over the appeals system, which would be welcomed by so many.

Mark Griffin mentioned warehouses that are used by online retailers who pay very little in non-domestic rates, compared with others. That highlights that change is needed.

The current system of business rates is outdated, and we need to look at a much greater and broader reform. High streets in our local towns and villages struggled for years before the pandemic and have struggled right through it. We have to look at and work with our local businesses to develop a system of rates that works for them and encourages growth. We need to put the voices of business at the heart of our policy making, and I do not see much of that from the SNP-Green devolved Government. Although I welcome the aims and outcomes of the Barclay review, many have viewed its remit as too tight and not wide ranging enough to give the freedom to look at the full picture.

In summary, we welcome the bill as a first, small step. However, more needs to be done. The Scottish Government has the powers. It needs to stop sitting on its hands and use them.

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. My app did not refresh. I would have voted no.

We are in Scotland. At least there is a bit of clarity from the UK Government. All that we get from the cabinet secretary is smoke and mirrors. She gives no answers about where the jobs will be cut. She needs to come clean with our public sector workers and let them know where the planned cuts to the workforce will take place.

I want to focus on the impact of the proposed savage cuts to local government in the spending review and on the impact of the wider economic situation on our vital public services. I have spoken before in the chamber about the importance of prevention in all our public services and the need for investment in preventive services that stops greater expenditure further down the line. I would like to focus on that, which I thought was a view that many members from all parties shared.

The spending review has shown us that this SNP devolved Government is planning to cut local government’s budget by 8 per cent in real terms by 2027. The Government suggests that local government should make savings by reducing real estate, increasing digitisation and having more shared services. That advice is an insult. That is teaching your granny how to suck eggs—local government has been doing that for the past five years to balance its budget in the face of SNP austerity.

For many local authorities, the low-hanging fruit has gone and efficiencies through digitisation have been achieved. The headcount reduction, in conjunction with unions, has been done. This deal means that jobs will be lost. Bins will be collected less often. Care packages will be cut. New schools will not be built. Roads will not be repaired. Sports facilities and libraries will close. All of that is happening on this Government’s watch, and it is a disgrace.

—and not its obsession with independence. We need more spending on our local authorities so that they can deliver our vital services. We need this false nod—

It is good to be discussing this important topic, because we were unable to do so last week, as my colleague Liz Smith pointed out.

The spending review highlights the SNP-Green devolved Government’s mismanagement of our economy. With the highest-ever core block grant coming from the UK Government and more investment in Scotland than we have seen previously, it is ridiculous to see an SNP minister defend their economic decisions as they did last week.

Let us be clear that the tough decisions that this devolved Government is now facing are a direct consequence of its economic incompetence. At yesterday’s Finance and Public Administration Committee, I questioned the Cabinet Secretary for Finance on public sector job cuts. At first, I was given the usual smoke and mirrors, as we would expect of the SNP, but it was eventually mentioned that figures would go back to the levels that we saw before the pandemic.

Most of the increase was for health, and the cabinet secretary said that there will be no cuts to health staff. We have more than 1,000 staff in Social Security Scotland; I presume that that number will not be cut. We are expanding early learning and childcare provision; I presume that the Scottish Government will not reverse that policy. Therefore, we can presume only that the hammer will fall on the likes of the police, firefighters, teachers, social workers, carers, refuse collectors, road workers and lecturers, whom we need to upskill our workforce.