Chamber and committees

To ask the Scottish Government what progress it has made in the current parliamentary session on preventing gender-based violence in relation to non-fatal strangulation. (S6O-05471)

The proposed budget reduces the rail infrastructure improvement and rolling stock projects budget by 16.5 per cent. Will the cabinet secretary outline how that will impact the ability to procure new rolling stock and infrastructure improvements, particularly in relation to the procurement of new trains to replace ScotRail’s high-speed train fleet?

I struggled to hear most of that response, but I will do my best.

A Centre for Women’s Justice article, posted on its website, said:

“Many survivors describe how they truly believed they were going to die whilst they were being strangled. Some report such offending as taking place in full view of their children. Not being able to breathe is terrifying”.

The bringing in of a stand-alone offence in England and Wales has been welcomed by front-line organisations such as Women’s Aid and the Domestic Abuse Commissioner. Why are the Scottish victims still being left behind? What message does the minister think that it sends that victims here get less protection?

The proposed budget reduces the rail infrastructure improvement and rolling stock projects budget by 16.5 per cent. Will the cabinet secretary outline how that will impact the ability to procure new rolling stock and infrastructure improvements, particularly in relation to the procurement of new trains to replace ScotRail’s high-speed train fleet?

To ask the Scottish Government what progress it has made in the current parliamentary session on preventing gender-based violence in relation to non-fatal strangulation. (S6O-05471)

The SNP proposals to shake up council tax in Scotland are yet another brutal raid on household finances, shifting even more pressure on to families and councils at a time when both are already under serious strain. Across Scotland, families face higher energy bills, rising food prices and increased mortgages and rents. Against that backdrop, the prospect of council tax rises, combined with additional local charges, fees and levies, is not only unwelcome but unfair. Taxpayers should not be treated as a cash cow to compensate for the nationalists’ repeated failures to manage the public finances.

Over recent years, Edinburgh residents have seen a significant change in how the City of Edinburgh Council raises money, through a steady creep of new charges, permits, penalties and fees. Those are never presented as council tax rises but together amount to a fundamental shift in who pays, how they pay and how often they pay. For example, until 2018, garden waste collection was free. However, the council then introduced a permit, initially at £25 a year. Today, that permit costs £45—an 80 per cent increase—which is paid on top of council tax. It was justified at the time, but around 70,000 to 77,000 households now pay that charge every year, and the service generates nearly £3 million annually and has generated close to £10 million in the past four years.

Another example is parking charges. Controlled parking zones have spread across Edinburgh, whether residents want them or not. Residents who once parked outside their homes can no longer do so unless they pay the council for the pleasure. The cost may appear small, with a typical resident permit costing between £80 and £100 a year, but to have to pay that simply to park outside their own home is ridiculous. Nevertheless, if they live in a controlled zone and they own a car, what other choice do they have? They have to pay to park. There are plans to introduce parking charges across towns in East Lothian, in a rather tone-deaf manner. Moreover, East Lothian Council wants to make its own staff exempt, which would be utterly unfair.

Businesses face the same cumulative pressure, as business rates have driven their bills up higher still. If we add the rising parking costs, waste charges and enforcement penalties, it is clear why so many small businesses feel squeezed out of the city. Let us not forget the punitive low-emission zones, with escalating penalties for entering certain parts of the city.

A visitor levy—in effect, a tourist tax—is planned next. It has been pitched as a solution to every budget pressure in the capital. The tourist tax will pay for this; the tourist tax will pay for that. Everyone is queuing up for a bit of the cash. However, everyone would pay, not just the tourists. Someone from Linlithgow who stayed overnight in Edinburgh would pay—as would I, an Edinburgh resident, if I fancied a night in the city. I already live in the city and pay its council tax.

Each charge may have a tangible benefit and a rationale to those who choose to introduce it. However, taken together, the charges represent a shift away from transparent collective funding and towards piecemeal charging through which residents pay repeatedly, quietly and often without choice. That is what stealth taxes look like. They are harder to see than a single tax rise, but they are felt every day on the high streets and in households across Edinburgh.

Central to that problem—and the cause of it—is the long-term underfunding of local government by the SNP. That has left councils facing impossible choices between cutting vital services and increasing local taxes. From social care to road maintenance, everything is under strain.

We recognise that council tax is not a perfect system. However, any reform must be fair, proportionate and rooted in economic reality. The current consultation does not meet that test. Instead, it risks creating further instability and anxiety. It should be withdrawn and councils should be funded properly, so that they can protect essential services and deliver real relief for households.

Will the member take an intervention?

The SNP proposals to shake up council tax in Scotland are yet another brutal raid on household finances, shifting even more pressure on to families and councils at a time when both are already under serious strain. Across Scotland, families face higher energy bills, rising food prices and increased mortgages and rents. Against that backdrop, the prospect of council tax rises, combined with additional local charges, fees and levies, is not only unwelcome but unfair. Taxpayers should not be treated as a cash cow to compensate for the nationalists’ repeated failures to manage the public finances.

Over recent years, Edinburgh residents have seen a significant change in how the City of Edinburgh Council raises money, through a steady creep of new charges, permits, penalties and fees. Those are never presented as council tax rises but together amount to a fundamental shift in who pays, how they pay and how often they pay. For example, until 2018, garden waste collection was free. However, the council then introduced a permit, initially at £25 a year. Today, that permit costs £45—an 80 per cent increase—which is paid on top of council tax. It was justified at the time, but around 70,000 to 77,000 households now pay that charge every year, and the service generates nearly £3 million annually and has generated close to £10 million in the past four years.

Another example is parking charges. Controlled parking zones have spread across Edinburgh, whether residents want them or not. Residents who once parked outside their homes can no longer do so unless they pay the council for the pleasure. The cost may appear small, with a typical resident permit costing between £80 and £100 a year, but to have to pay that simply to park outside their own home is ridiculous. Nevertheless, if they live in a controlled zone and they own a car, what other choice do they have? They have to pay to park. There are plans to introduce parking charges across towns in East Lothian, in a rather tone-deaf manner. Moreover, East Lothian Council wants to make its own staff exempt, which would be utterly unfair.

Businesses face the same cumulative pressure, as business rates have driven their bills up higher still. If we add the rising parking costs, waste charges and enforcement penalties, it is clear why so many small businesses feel squeezed out of the city. Let us not forget the punitive low-emission zones, with escalating penalties for entering certain parts of the city.

A visitor levy—in effect, a tourist tax—is planned next. It has been pitched as a solution to every budget pressure in the capital. The tourist tax will pay for this; the tourist tax will pay for that. Everyone is queuing up for a bit of the cash. However, everyone would pay, not just the tourists. Someone from Linlithgow who stayed overnight in Edinburgh would pay—as would I, an Edinburgh resident, if I fancied a night in the city. I already live in the city and pay its council tax.

Each charge may have a tangible benefit and a rationale to those who choose to introduce it. However, taken together, the charges represent a shift away from transparent collective funding and towards piecemeal charging through which residents pay repeatedly, quietly and often without choice. That is what stealth taxes look like. They are harder to see than a single tax rise, but they are felt every day on the high streets and in households across Edinburgh.

Central to that problem—and the cause of it—is the long-term underfunding of local government by the SNP. That has left councils facing impossible choices between cutting vital services and increasing local taxes. From social care to road maintenance, everything is under strain.

We recognise that council tax is not a perfect system. However, any reform must be fair, proportionate and rooted in economic reality. The current consultation does not meet that test. Instead, it risks creating further instability and anxiety. It should be withdrawn and councils should be funded properly, so that they can protect essential services and deliver real relief for households.

Will the member take an intervention?

Not at this time, as I am concluding.

A social worker cannot access the necessary services and resources that might be available to prevent that child from going into care, and that is not addressed in the bill. My amendment 124 would turn that into an affirmative procedure and, together, amendments 102 and 124 move the bill towards obligation, capability and the equity of access across Scotland.