Chamber and committees

What cuts will the member’s local council face as a result of this budget?

I add my best wishes to those that have already been expressed to the cabinet secretary.

I open by thanking all those who work across our public services for all the hard work that they have put in, especially during the pandemic, to help support our families and communities.

In the limited time that I have, I will concentrate my comments on the social care crisis faced by councils across Scotland and on the delivery of the policy to extend free personal care to people under the age of 65.

Local authorities from across Scotland are warning of the social care crisis that they face. Here in my own area—the city of Edinburgh—that crisis has become acute. It was reported this week that council staff have been asked to volunteer for secondments to help plug the gap in the capital’s social care workforce. I am disappointed that the minister responsible for that issue has left the chamber; I would have liked an intervention from him on that matter.

A report to the Edinburgh integration joint board, which oversees health and social care services in the capital, makes clear that there is a crisis. Between September and December, 83 people across the capital needed arrangements for services that they had not received, and a total of 1,400 hours of care had to be provided by outside agencies. The report noted the extreme distress that that caused many people and their families.

The cabinet secretary did not mention the social care crisis in her speech.

I associate myself with what Monica Lennon has said. It is important for campaigners that we consider the Scottish Government’s progress in this work. I hope that ministers will take that on board. Are ministers already looking at a national record of historical forced adoption experiences? When are we likely to see announcements on that work, which campaigners really want to be progressed as soon as possible?

That does not get us away from the fact that I am talking about. Under this SNP-Green Government budget, Edinburgh will receive one of the lowest levels of funding per head, both for our council and for our health board. It does nothing to address the social care crisis in the capital.

For a long time, there has been growing concern about ministers’ plans to destabilise services further, the potential impact of which could undermine fragile local services and accountability, making a difficult situation even worse. As my colleague Liz Smith said, there are serious concerns about the top-down restructuring and redevelopment of social care through a national care service. The total restructuring of social care in Scotland will be hugely destabilising. We must accept that. It will present significant challenges and bring considerable additional costs to our local authorities. Scotland does not need a national care service; it needs SNP and Green ministers to properly fund local care services.

That brings me to the policy to extend free personal care to people under the age of 65, which is something that I campaigned for in the previous session of Parliament. I am passionate that we should see that fully delivered.

I am therefore more than disappointed and concerned about the lack of progress that we have seen on delivering the policy to extend free personal care, and the increasing secrecy around it. The Scottish Government committed to deliver the extension of free personal care—known as Frank’s law—in 2019, but no data has been provided on how it has actually been delivered.

When I spoke to Amanda Kopel, Frank’s wife, this week, she told me that she is concerned that two years and eight months—almost three years—after Frank’s law was initially implemented following the campaign that she fought, there are still no figures on the uptake of the policy. Covid must not be used as an excuse for the discrepancies in the proper implementation of the policy across all our councils. Amanda said:

“I and many thousands of Frank’s law supporters do not want to think that our six-year battle for justice, fairness and equality was all in vain.”

I agree.

In 2019, the Scottish Government promised councils £30 million in the budget to deliver the policy. Despite written questions and freedom of information requests, however, we have not been able to obtain information on how much of that has been provided to councils, or indeed how many people have been given access to the care and support that they need and now have a legal right to receive.

Given the problems that people have experienced in accessing care packages during the pandemic, with many packages being removed from individuals or cut, it is concerning that there are more and more reports that people with complex needs and life-limiting conditions are not getting that vital care. I hope that delivering and protecting free personal care will become one of our main focuses in future budgets, because all parties have supported it. It is vital that care packages and assessments for personal care are fully restored across Scotland.

It is clear that the pre-pandemic pressures on social care services are only going to increase in the post-pandemic environment. As I said, I hope that, in the future, we will all focus on social care services and the crisis across Scotland, but especially here in the capital, whose people I represent in the Parliament. That is why I am disappointed that ministers have not agreed to my proposal that a national recovery group be convened. We desperately need that, and we desperately need national leadership on the issue—something that is lacking from the budget that we are discussing today.

Last year, Glasgow City Council was able to recover £8.8 million from the health mobilisation plan arrangement through its integration joint board, while Edinburgh was unable to recover the equivalent cost of £9.3 million. I have raised the issue with the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and the Economy, but I have not heard a response to date. First, should that financial anomaly be addressed? Secondly, does the Scottish Government intend to extend the tenant grant fund beyond March of this year?

Research has shown that households that have prepayment meters often face additional challenges with fuel poverty. Has the Scottish Government spoken to energy companies about the replacement of prepayment meters? What support schemes are being developed, given that we know that that has an impact?

Yes, please, convener. I want to drill down into the competing pressures and strategic outcomes. For example, we know the targets that the country has set itself for the production of renewable energy. Do the witnesses think that NPF4, as it is currently drafted, will help to deliver renewable energy in their council areas, given the competing demands that exist, such as those relating to the restoration of peatlands? How will that be taken into consideration? That is quite a wide question, but I want to look at how NPF4 will meet the targets in the world of renewables.

We have already touched on infrastructure. The draft NPF4 says:

“We want an infrastructure-first approach to be embedded in Scotland’s planning system.”

What should that look like? Will NPF4 as drafted help to achieve that?

The development of the national planning framework is the opportunity to demand of all councils that we meet our renewable energy targets. Will NPF4 help you to do that? There will be more difficult and challenging issues. For example, many communities will come to you with objections to larger wind turbines, but the job of meeting the targets has really been given to planning departments. Will you have the tools to help you to deliver in that regard? This is a national mission across Scotland, which planning departments are tasked to achieve. What would make the process easier? A lot of applications end up being called in by the Scottish Government because of the challenges. Will NPF4 make your job easier or more difficult?

Would anyone else like to come in on that?