Chamber and committees

Thank you.

I want to ask about competing priorities for planners and local councillors who will make the decisions. NPF4 will be part of our redevelopment plan, and planners and councillors will sometimes be expected to balance competing policy objectives within different documents within that plan but also the competing priorities of their local communities, who might not be so supportive of what is in the plan. What guidance will the directorate give to planning authorities and councillors about how they balance their competing priorities?

I want to ask about the deliverability of a number of the proposals—[Inaudible.] There were a lot of very desirable proposals that communities will want to see delivered. Has any thought been given to producing a document that sets out the Scottish Government’s capital investment plan to support those proposals so that they can be scrutinised in the round and communities can get a better idea of what will and perhaps will not be delivered?

I take your point about the delivery plan not being in place until the final document is approved. In relation to long-term deliverability, the NPF4 will be in place for much longer than its predecessors—for 10 years as opposed to five years. How will that longer period impact on when reviews take place, how progress in implementation is tracked and how the framework might be amended?

Just to touch on the industrial landscape that you talk about, it is clear that local government workers have performed heroically through the pandemic and are still doing so. What will the situation be for public services in Scotland if a flat cash award is made to local government staff? We always rely on local government-provided services, but we have done so to an even greater extent during the pandemic. If a flat cash pay award is made, what impact will that have on those services in the coming year?

Given how heroically local government staff have performed throughout the pandemic, and how frustrated they have been at not receiving a pandemic bonus payment or a pay increase at a similar level to NHS staff, do the cabinet secretaries feel that local government staff deserve an inflationary pay rise this year to cover the increasing cost of living?

I have a quick question off the back of Unison’s evidence. Unison is making the case for an inflationary pay uplift for local government staff. Does Councillor Macgregor feel that that will be possible? Can such an offer be made within the budget settlement?

Good morning. I want to come back to the issue around local government staff pay and morale and councils’ ability to deliver services. The cabinet secretary has said that the local government core budget is being protected in cash terms. Given inflation and demographic pressures, that means a significant cut, as we all know. How would your members react to being told that their wages are going to be protected in cash terms this year, with inflation running as it is?

If they watched earlier evidence panels, both cabinet secretaries will have heard from some representatives about the surveys that they have done of their members and about their consultative ballots this past year. The cabinet secretaries will also have heard from local government workers in their constituencies about how undervalued and angry they feel because there has been a failure to reward them for the amount of work that they have done.

Last year, there was a real prospect of strike action disrupting public services, which the Government’s provision of additional funding to make a more generous pay offer averted at the eleventh hour. However, we know that COSLA has said that, this year, making an inflationary pay award would not be possible with a flat cash settlement for the core budget.

What would the cabinet secretaries say in response to the prospect of industrial action being taken this year by local government and public sector workers who do not feel valued because of a lack of an adequate pay offer? Such action would have an impact on public services on top of the disruption that we have already seen because of the pandemic—I know from personal experience the impact that disruptions to nursery and primary school education can have.

I will be brief. I have been heavily influenced by the evidence that we have taken, particularly the evidence that was given by Police Scotland in our final evidence session on the need for a degree of licensing to be introduced.

I would have preferred it if the proposal had been trialled through a pilot project to see how a licensing scheme could be operated, as that would have given assurance to the sector. In addition, I am in favour of local authorities potentially being given the discretion to decide whether licensing would be suitable for their area, in consultation with their communities and Police Scotland.

However, in the absence of any alternative proposals, the committee is faced with a “Take it or leave it” decision on the proposed licensing scheme. I support the proposals in the knowledge that there will be a review in 2023, and in the light of what the cabinet secretary said about the industry’s desire to get back round the table to discuss implementation.