Chamber and committees

We have been clear that we want to strengthen community engagement, particularly in relation to planning, as you have heard from the minister who leads on planning. Today’s evidence session gives us an opportunity to reflect on the matter and, if we may, we will come back to the committee on some of those issues more substantively through our PSR engagement. Ultimately, we want to reflect on how we can strengthen the opportunity for local communities to be better engaged in the process. We will all have examples from our constituencies of where that has not been the case.

I suspect that it may well do.

We need to look at it in the round. I do not want to prejudge the outcome of the budget agreement, which will be contingent on the settlement from the UK Government, but we need to be cognisant of the additional costs that are bearing down on house builders at present, not least due to inflation, which is driving up building costs across the market. We will consider all those things in the round, and I will do that through engagement with other cabinet secretaries—not least the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice and Housing, who will, I think, be in front of the committee next week ahead of the budget.

Good morning. I am grateful to the committee for the opportunity to set out the Scottish Government’s priorities alongside the Minister for Public Finance. I am happy to provide opening comments from both of us.

Local government, planning and community empowerment are all areas that are fundamental to improving outcomes for the people of Scotland. They are also areas in which partnership working is essential. Local government is a vital partner in delivering public services, supporting economic growth, tackling poverty and helping our communities to thrive. Despite the challenging fiscal environment that we face, the Scottish Government has sought to provide stability and support with record funding of £15.7 billion being provided to local government in 2026-27.

Alongside that, we have provided greater flexibilities to local government than ever before, with more than £2.3 billion of funding that was previously ring fenced or transferred in year now having been consolidated into the general revenue grant.

Alongside that investment, we are committed to strengthening the relationship between national and local government. On 28 July 2026, I attended the first biannual meeting between the First Minister and the president of the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities since the Parliament’s election. At that meeting, we committed to regular engagement with COSLA to monitor progress towards our shared priorities. I also met with the COSLA leadership and its political group leaders over the summer. We established an agreed need for reform of public services to meet the complex demographic, fiscal and demand-led challenges that face those services.

As announced by the First Minister, the programme for government is focused on community empowerment and our wider programme of public service reform. We are committed to working in partnership with COSLA to drive that reform agenda and ensure that services are sustainable and centred on the needs of our communities. To support that, we will engage in an intensive dialogue over the next three months with partners in local government and across the Parliament, and with stakeholders, including representatives from local communities, to reach a clear shared direction on the future of local government in Scotland.

Planning has a crucial role in the delivery of our ambitions, and we continue to invest in planning capacity, improve performance and work with stakeholders to identify practical reforms that will support development while maintaining confidence in the planning process. Our focus is on having a planning system that enables delivery, attracts investment and supports sustainable communities across Scotland.

Across each of those areas, our objective is clear: to work in partnership with local government, communities and stakeholders to deliver public service reform, strengthen local democracy and improve outcomes for the people of Scotland. Ms Goodlad and I look forward to discussing those issues with the committee and answering members’ questions.

I am happy to take that away and more than happy to come and visit Falkirk at any point in the future, Mr Bouse.

That is a very wide-ranging question. I am conscious that I have my minister, Ms Goodlad, beside me and that she will want to come in with her reflections, but public service reform is essential to local government. I know that we will come on to talk about this in more detail, but PSR applies to local government in a way that it might not apply to other parts of the public sector, so when it comes to engagement with local government, we have to start from a position of partnership working.

The first meeting that I undertook in my new role was with COSLA, in Parliament, a few days after having been appointed. It was clear to me then that we need to continue that approach to partnership working. As you know, I have come from three years in the education brief, and I could have delivered on none of my aspirations in education were it not for partnership working with local government, so we have to start from that premise.

Secondly, on local government sustainability—again, I am sure that we will come on to talk about this more—a number of recent reports have caused me concern about the sustainability of local government finance at local level. Obviously, that is monitored by the Accounts Commission for Scotland, and the committee will take a keen interest in local government sustainability, too. We also have in-house monitoring that considers some of the challenges more broadly. However, there are challenges with local government sustainability at the local level, so PSR is a financial necessity in relation to that.

Thirdly, I think that there is an opportunity through PSR to strengthen local democracy. I am sure that Ms Goodlad will want to say more on this point. For me, the third tenet is about how we strengthen local democracy in our communities. PSR is an opportunity for local government to be strengthened and to allow people to reflect on the services that they receive. I am sure that we will come on to talk about COSLA’s views in that respect. Over the summer months, I spent a great deal of my time with COSLA, listening to its views as an organisation directly representing its members. However, we also need to be cognisant of the views of the public and our constituents. They all have strong views on public services.

Therefore, a key part of our work on PSR in terms of local government reform, and a priority for me, is how we engage the public in the process, particularly in the three-month focus period. Our constituents have strong views on their local services, and they tell us when things are not working. I am clear that some things in our local communities are not working in the way that they should. Local government reform is an opportunity to strengthen local democracy as much as it is an opportunity to deliver on the wider efficiencies in terms of our priorities.

I will bring in Ms Goodlad to give some of her reflections, as I think that she might feel quite strongly on the latter point.

My experience of engaging with trade unions, in education and in transport, has always been positive. My experience of the Scottish Trades Union Congress is that the trade unions come to the table with ideas and proposals on how efficiencies might be delivered. I do not view the unions as a roadblock to our work on public service reform. They have clear views in relation to their memberships, and it is right that they protect their members’ interests and do all that they can to advocate for them, as that is the job of trade unionists. However, they also have lots of great ideas.

Mr McKee and I had a really interesting meeting with Roz Foyer of the STUC in August, from which we have taken away a number of suggestions that we will bring back to the table in a few weeks’ time when we engage with the trade unions more broadly.

I do not view the trade unions in that way. They are a partner, as much as local government is, and we have to work collectively.

It will be challenging.

I engaged with Glasgow City Council over the course of summer recess, but have not done so since the report came out, although the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice and Housing met with the council last Wednesday.

The situation is challenging for a number of reasons. The Accounts Commission report talked about a notional shortfall of £592 million—that is nationally—but the budget is delivering an extra £620 million and all parts of Scotland were able to balance their budgets for 2026-27. It is important to recount that sustainability.

Regarding Glasgow, the deputy convener is right to talk about the issues relating to equal pay. The local authority in Glasgow is having to respond to challenges not of its own making, which should be understood. I have written to the United Kingdom Government, as has the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice and Housing, to request a meeting on some of the wider issues, particularly in relation to Glasgow’s liability for equal pay, because the council is having to shoulder a deeply challenging burden.

We looked to provide additionality for Glasgow in last year’s budget and, through the budget settlement for 2026-27, Glasgow is receiving £1.8 billion to fund local services, including a homelessness services, which means that the city has had an increase of more than 7 per cent since 2025-26. I understand that the committee will take evidence from the social justice secretary next week, when she may want to say more about that, but we have looked to provide additional support for Glasgow, recognising some of the challenges. Members may be aware of my correspondence with Glasgow City Council, which I have shared and which gives some assurance about what we might be able to do, through the budget settlement, to recognise some current challenges that are unique to Glasgow.

That is correct—it was free school meals. There were additional asks about baselining funding, and the real living wage commitment was also met.

Significant additionality was provided through the budget last year to recognise the challenges, particularly in relation to social care, which were set out by the Accounts Commission. The Government also provided additionality to meet other commitments, not least in relation to the real living wage.

This year, our approach to budget engagement will follow a similar pattern. It will be informed by the settlement that we receive from the UK Government. However, I would like us to continue in the space that we got to last year, because our engagement throughout the budget process was broadly welcomed by COSLA and by your predecessor committee. Our approach will also reflect the challenges that members have raised in relation to social care.