 Felly mae'n cerddechrau, yn y cerddechrau, i yw ddweudio cymaint i'r pan cywil yng Nghymru gyda I-118-11 ynghylch, yn y ffordd boidol i ddim yn unignau i ddefnyddian o'r cyfrifiadau a'r autonomau ar yr I-118. Mae'n cerddechrau i mwyon o'r ddulltog i ddymae, o'r ddweudio i ddau amdanaethau ac yn byw, I call on Kevin Stewart now to speak to and move the motion on behalf of the committee. Mr Stewart, you have 13 minutes please. An exact 13 minutes please. Thank you, Presiding Officer. It gives me great pleasure to open today's debate on behalf of the local government and regeneration committee on our report into the flexibility and autonomy in local government. The report was completed shortly before the summer recess and Parliament also has the benefit of the Scottish Government's response to our report. Also of some relevance today is the report of the commission on strengthening local democracy which was set up and run by the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities. I may touch on aspects of that report later in my speech but for now I want to concentrate on our report. Earlier this year the committee agreed to undertake a short inquiry to examine the levels of flexibility and autonomy available to local government in Scotland. In many ways this was a natural follow-on from other work we have undertaken this session, things like our three stage report into public service reform, our work looking at the delivery of regeneration in Scotland and the report we produced looking at the turnout at the last local government elections. We wanted to inform the on-going debate on whether there is a need to strengthen and enhance local democratic structures in Scotland. We thought our work was timely given other activity taking place across our country, never realising just how timely it would turn out to be as the year has unfolded and focus has turned more and more towards local democracy. We wanted to know in particular how local government could become more effective, more accountable and more accessible to people and communities. In the course of our inquiry during the Easter recess three members of the committee visited Hamburg, Copenhagen and Malmo in a whistle-stop tour talking to local politicians in each country and comparing how their local democratic systems worked. We also heard from academics, council leaders, members of the commission I mentioned earlier, leaders of minority groupings on councils and from the office bearers in the newly re-established Scottish province association. We utilised video link technology to speak to politicians in the island islands before hearing from the minister. Of course we were extremely keen to hear from local people and gain their views. We do a lot of that and have in the last couple of years covered the length and breadth of the country, ranging from Shetland to Dumfries, from Stornoway to Glasgow to Aire to Cumbernauld and Dundee as well of course to Aberdeen. We have used Twitter to run discussions, listen to folks on web exchanges and are now the first committee in these islands to have our own Instagram account, although I have to be honest and say that I don't really know how that works, Presiding Officer. We have lots of tales to tell but there has been one constant message that we have received and we have received it loud and clear and it is that democracy must not start and finish at the national level or even at council HQ level. It must become more effective, more accountable and more accessible to people and communities. Remember we wrote a report before the events of September 18th and the mobilisation of Civic Scotland to become involved in decisions which affect them. Even before we started our current scrutiny of the community empowerment bill, we knew we had been told again and again if communities are to be empowered it is clear powers must be passed down through the tiers of government. Let me say straight away local authorities currently have powers available to them to devolve functions along with budgets to a community level. We know that, they know that but it is not happening and we were keen to find out why it was not happening. We divided our report into five parts. I will say a few words in each while concentrating mostly on flexibility. I repeat there is ample opportunity for local authorities to be more flexible, to devolve down, to not only involve local people but to empower them. It is interesting the commission report majors on increasing the number of local authorities and councillors while at the same time agreeing with us about the need to devolve power to the most appropriate level, to enhance subsidiarity and to remove centralist controlling tendencies. The message we received from those in communities we consulted was clear. They had no interest in the size or structure of authorities, what concerns them is their ability to influence. We agree with the Provost Association, long-serving councillors who have lived through previous reorganisations. They advised against significant change to existing structures. Like a number of other witnesses they pointed to changes happening now involving the sharing of services and functions to joint boards and of course the sharing of budgets. They were clear as was the minister that any new structures would be a distraction and simply divert attention from devolving powers down. The Scottish Community Alliance suggested that there is no doubt that councils have invested heavily in attempting to engage communities more effectively before adding most have resulted in abject failure. We wondered why that was as local authorities talk constantly about subsidiarity although most communities disagreed telling us councillors were too remote and in particular power was centralised. That happened in the Western Isles where they thought there was far too much focus and storm away and that happened just the other week in our visit to Fort William where they thought that power was centralised far too much in Inverness. Local communities to a man, woman and school child all wanted more influence, involvement and autonomy. We were frequently told their opinions do not count, the decision has already been made. Yet some councillors told us it is very easy to work with communities if we put our minds to it. It is not about having a chat with people, it is about empowering the community. So why is it not happening? Why are communities not being empowered to make local decisions? Both councillors and officials from local authorities told us they were restricted in what they were allowed to do, what actions they could take. With examples given of restrictions preventing them from devolving budgets or empowering local communities, every time we heard this we asked what was the barrier, what was preventing them acting, asked them to explain the restriction and why can this not happen. You know what? They generally admitted it was their own self-given restrictions and internal cultures. They agreed they have the tools and ability, they also agreed the barriers existed mainly in their own mindsets. It takes courage, it takes will power and that applies on both sides. Local authorities must display this but so too must communities to demand empowerment, take it and use it when offered. There are many opportunities coming in the community empowerment bill but, frankly, there are many that already exist. That bill is largely a measure to ensure that authorities do some things that they should have been doing for many, many years, to engage meaningfully, to involve local communities and to devolve responsibility and accountability down to the lowest possible level. We heard about and discussed who should exercise devolve power in communities. There is lots of talk about community councils getting more powers, mainly that has to be said from community councillors themselves. Frankly, we don't think it matters who the powers go to as long as they are representative of the community. We need a flexible approach and if a body is respected by the community, it is representative of them, be it a residence or housing association, a tenants association, a community trust, a community centre or whatever, then they should be offered powers on behalf of the community. These powers should be accompanied by budgets to exercise on behalf of these very same communities. Our second strand, looking at public engagement, also covers turnout at local elections. In our report in the 2012 local government elections we made a number of recommendations covering voter turnout, postal and proxy voting, ordering of the ballot paper and the timing of elections. We also made recommendations about increasing diversity, the age of voters and other equality matters. Perhaps the minister today could update the chamber on when the results of his subsequent consultation will be published and how the recommendations we made are to be addressed. I don't propose to dwell long on our third strand relating to funding mechanisms. As the committee unanimously agreed, this requires to be addressed and that a resolution be reached before the next local elections in 2017. We recommended an independent cross party commission be established to take this forward. I am pleased that the government seems to agree with us and look forward to that commission starting its work soon. Perhaps the minister will take the opportunity today to update plans in that regard and confirm what the commission will look at. Our fourth strand looked at remote peripheral or island communities. We support the principle of joint working between the island authorities and for them to receive more powers. This would allow them to implement to bespoke local policies in their areas. A flexible approach is required. We were pleased to learn the Lerwick legislation applies equally to all parts of Scotland. We did not see a need or indeed a desirability for all local authorities to have identical powers, which takes me into our fifth strand, where we consider the level of legal flexibility and autonomy from central government that local government should enjoy. Local authorities exercise many duties on behalf of the people. Some mandatory such as schooling, social welfare and housing. Others are discretionary powers such as promoting economic development, promoting the arts and tourism. Academic witnesses, when wondering why devolution had not followed through to local government, talk about a tendency for central control. They suggested parties in opposition are generally keen on decentralisation and parties in government centralise. They said the same applies to councils, which illustrates perhaps a controlling tendency across all politicians at whatever level when in power. I do not think that that necessarily applies to all politicians. I think that the community empowerment bill is an example of where we can do much better. We have said in a number of our reports that retaining control at the centre stifles innovation, whether that centre be Inverness, Stornoway, Edinburgh, Westminster. It stifles innovation and also stops risk taking. Yes, governments and councils have democratic mandates, but we maintain these should be exercised with or by the people not done to them. We expect the risk aversion culture to be addressed. Only in this way will staff and communities become empowered and only then will innovation be encouraged. What we want to see is local authorities using their existing powers better, adopting greater flexibility in their policies and practices. Structures should suit communities, not the centre, and we anticipate different structures in different places both within and across authorities. The role of central government should be to specify core services and set minimum standards. Thereafter, local authorities should be free—indeed, they are free at the moment—to determine which standards need to be exceeded locally, be that across their region or in more discrete areas. These should be able to act flexibly to reflect local need in making such decisions where clear the authority is properly exercising its democratic functions. We expect services to differ to meet needs across the country. Communities should not all expect identical service provision beyond agreed levels. Oes was a fairly wide-ranging report, albeit into the single subject of local government. Our report was unanimous. All of us agreed with every one of our conclusions. I hope you agree that the report was timely. I look forward to hearing contributions from members across the chamber and I am delighted to move the motion in my name and ask Parliament to note the report by the local government and regeneration committee on flexibility and autonomy in local government. Thank you. Very good. Thank you very much. I now call on Minister Marco Viaget, nine minutes. Please minister. Thank you, Presiding Officer, and thanks also to the local government and regeneration committee on behalf of the Scottish Government for this inquiry. My congratulations to them for securing this debate also. Local government is an essential part of Scotland's government. It carries weighty responsibilities for delivering the services that the man or woman in the street needs. Starting with the street itself and going on to schools, housing, social care, parks, libraries, nurseries, support for business, town centres, the list is endless. Increasing the voice that man or woman in the street has through empowerment and engagement of their communities is an essential part of my ministerial role. It is not by accident that the portfolio is local government and community empowerment. Since the committee published its report, there have been three events that I think emphasise its timeliness and importance. First of all, the referendum saw levels of voter participation that were unparalleled in our democratic history. The 85% turnout demonstrated a huge popular appetite to participate in decision making. The ensuing Smith report has provided the second. While across this chamber we may and no doubt do have different opinions on the next steps for the report as a whole, I hope we can rally around two key sections. Lord Smith's forward referencing the transfer of powers from Holyrood to local communities and the proposal to give Holyrood control over its own elections, which will enable this Parliament to extend the franchise to 16 and 17-year-olds in time for our next elections in 2016, we hope. Thirdly, the publication of our programme for government has set the empowering and engaging of communities at its rightful place, which is the heart of everything we do. All of this in just the last three short months. Today is indeed the right time to air the questions about where we go from here. In that regard, the committee's report isn't just timely, it's also substantial. We've always known that the electorate is keenly interested in how the nation is run, but the independence referendum was a passionate engagement in democracy, one that contrasts starkly with the turnout of under 40% for the last local Government election or indeed the 50% for Holyrood. On local election voter turnout, the committee concluded that the relatively low level of engagement in formal local politics is partly related to the nature of the relationship that citizens and communities have with Government, and that people are more interested in how functions are exercised and, crucially, whether they can influence them than they are by considerations like the number of councillors. Those are important conclusions that we endorse. We also note that the independent commission on strengthening local democracy, established by COSLA, considered this issue at length, too. As Kevin Stewart has already said earlier this year, our consultation on Scotland's electoral future sought views on how to encourage wider engagement and participation in the electoral process. My predecessor, Derek Mackay, established a group that brought together representatives from key sectors, including the third sector, youth organisations and political parties to discuss this way forward. In the new year, the Minister for Parliamentary Business and I will return to this group with the results of that consultation to again collaboratively consider the next steps. The committee also rightly reported that how people feel they are governed and how empowered they are to influence decisions that affect their lives is not just about devolution from Westminster to here or from here to local government. It is also about devolving responsibilities to local communities. Already today, participatory budgeting is being promoted by the Scottish Government with free training being provided to local authorities and others to raise awareness of this grassroots participatory activity. In the last two months, delegates from 26 local authority areas have attended six training events across Scotland. Participatory budgeting empowers communities by providing direct influence in how and where public funds are used in those communities. To repeat what the First Minister said in the programme for government, fostering a sense of participation is about more than consulting. We are therefore also providing funding direct to grassroots community bodies up and down the country to support their work and help build their capacities to act. We are investing £7.9 million this year and £9.4 million in the next to support community-led regeneration through the People and Communities Fund. In the programme for government, we also announced £10 million investment through an empowering communities fund. This will build on and complement existing support to further help communities to work on tackling inequalities on their own terms. There is no one template for enabling communities to be partners in decision making. Different communities will, by their nature, have different concerns, different attitudes to risk and a desire to create different structures as a result. Those have to be seen as a natural part of democracy rather than a barrier to it. In that regard, we also note the committee's well-made observations in their report on arms-length external organisations. In short, we cannot be prescriptive about which are the right powers to be exercised by communities and we are always open to new approaches in this regard, shown perhaps most clearly by the groundbreaking discussions with the islands areas ministerial working group that culminated in our new prospectus for the islands. What we must do, however, is to ensure that all communities, every single one, can take advantage of the new rights and powers that are coming in the community empowerment bill. That bill is an important step for ensuring that Scotland's current civic interest can grow, perhaps to borrow a phrase, blossom into a wholesale democratic renewal. In the spirit of working in partnership, as the new minister in charge of the bill, I would like to take this opportunity to offer to the spokespersons of all four opposition parties a chance early in the new year to come and meet and discuss this bill to listen to any views or proposals that they want to put forward. I think that we can sit around a table and, by a bit of collaboration, maybe a bit of frank discussion, ensure that the bill and what it sets out to do can reflect and do justice to this common goal that I think we all share. As a Government, we are also keen to ensure participation from all sides of the chamber on the future of local taxation. Local Government already has greater fiscal autonomy than this Parliament, with significant tax and borrowing powers and scope to raise revenues from charging and trading, as it does to the tune of over £2 billion. Since 2008, all of Scotland's council tax payers have been benefiting from a council tax freeze, which every local authority has chosen to apply and which the Government has matched with additional resources to make up for council's foregone income. Through this partnership, we have helped to keep household expenses down at a time when household incomes have been coming under pressure. Partnership is at the heart of our approach to local government, and I can therefore reiterate our commitment to working with COSLA to establish an independent commission to examine fairer alternatives to the council tax as a long-term solution. We are currently at the stage of engaging with the COSLA leadership on the commission, and we will be engaging with all political parties, too. I have sensed a definite willingness from COSLA to engage, and I hope to be able to update the chamber soon. Council tax contributes nearly £2 billion to funding local services. It is paid by over 2 million households, so the importance of this work, the importance of this commission can't be overstated. The need for a commission of this kind, as well, is another conclusion that was put forward in the committee's report and that we, as a Government, also share. Finally, Presiding Officer, in coming to these conclusions, the local government and regeneration committee has had to explore difficult, detailed and often what might have become very contentious areas. I think they've done so with knowledge, skill and tact, and so I wish to finish simply by once again acknowledging them for that work. Many thanks. I now call on Sarah Boyack, six minutes please. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer, and if I can just say to colleagues, because we are followed by the local government statement, if people will accept that, I have to leave the chamber at some points afternoon, I very much welcome this chance to debate the committee's report. I think 2014 will go down as an important year for the development of thinking about devolution, not just around the question of the independence referendum versus devolution, but the stronger Scottish Parliament that comes from that, but a debate that has been going on in parallel with both Kevin Stewart and Marco Biagi have talked about, which is the debate about double devolution, which I think we are here to debate this afternoon. I want to welcome the minister to his new post and say that I do think it's important that we think about transferring power not just from the UK to the Scottish level, the Scottish level to local authorities, but also on to our communities. I think the committee rightly references the contribution to that debate, a huge contribution that was made by the commissioning on strengthening local democracy. I think the range of discussions, the number of people involved in that process and the sheer length of time it went on has been helpful. When we were looking at our own contribution in powers for a purpose Labour's devolution commission, we looked at a fundamental question. I want to reflect on that, particularly following the minister's comments about finance and about the huge opportunities that local government has to shape its destiny. One of the fundamental questions that we wanted to look at was the extent to which local government is there to administer statutory services directed by this Parliament, paid for by the Scottish Government, and the role in implementing legislation and Scottish Government policy. What is the balance in terms of local accountability to represent the local democratic views across our different communities? What is the scope for local government to have the local state with the ambition that they want with the capacity to intervene locally? There is a balancing issue in that the last few years we've seen a paradox of more and more talk about community empowerment while we've seen a centralising state in Scotland. That remains a live issue for the work that has to be at the heart of the debate that is mentioned about finance. The committee's recommendations for genuine cross... I'm just referencing the committee. I'll take you if it's brief. Would Ms Boyack agree with me that local government has more flexibility in terms of what it wants to do now than it ever has before since the demise of ring fencing? Would she agree that they could go even further but sometimes it has been outlined in the report? There's a little bit of risk aversionous in going their own way. I'd actually say that while the headline is about more scope and power for local government, if you look at the detail in the council tax freeze and the implications that that has for local government funding, I would say that irony is that in day-to-day decision making local government doesn't have that flexibility that Mr Stewart claims for it. In fact I'm going to come on to that. I very much welcome the principle of cross-party discussions and I would agree with the committee that it needs to be more than just the council tax. I think we need to look at other funding issues that local government has to deal with and other fund raising opportunities because the problem at the moment is that local government is fixed on raising income through increasing charges and that does not meet the test of social equality or social inclusion because if you're somebody living benefiting from the council tax benefit and you're on a low income then increasing charges for services that used to be free mean that you are hit by the cost of living crisis. So it is complex and it is difficult and that's why I support the committee's recommendation that we do need to go beyond just looking at the council tax. It is now a relatively small part of council income and most of council's income now comes directly from the Scottish government so although we talk about local government we need to actually think where we want that balance to lie. The COSLA funded commission is absolutely clear but I don't think in terms of what's happening in the moment in the Scottish government's approach with the deals with COSLA that have been struck that it is actually genuinely empowering either local authorities or local communities and in a way that's why I was so interested in the our islands or future recommendations because they are radical and different. They're saying one size doesn't and shouldn't fit all. I think the bit that we need to look at in the middle if cities have city deals and the islands communities have our islands or future what happens to the relatively modestly sized councils or the small councils like Clutmanon, Perth and Kinross who are caught in the middle who are not automatically part of those wider debates. No, I definitely won't. The Smith agreement transfers new powers to the Scottish Government. I hope the Scottish Government will look at transferring those powers on to local government. I think the funding crisis that is currently faced by local government is severe. It needs to be owned up to. I had to look at the Edinburgh Council's budget test where you go online and you decide as a constituent and as a member of the people who live in the Edinburgh area how you want to spend their money. Once you start going in to change the buttons you realise just how difficult those decisions are. With the health board cash strapped with everyone agreeing we need to transfer resources into social care you just need to go into the council website and try and change the social care budget. Try and move the housing budget up for social care and the services up for local care and you'll see how difficult that is to do with a £67 million overspend and many of the things you'd want to shift further back coming up with a red line issue saying if you do this the council will not be able to make sure that we scrutinise our budget processes properly and that will lead to other problems. So that I would say councils are at one of the toughest times since the mid-period of the last Conservative Government decades ago. If you try to shift older people's care as we should do within the health budgets towards our local authorities the joined up process of health and social care integration is the right thing in principle but I would observe it's not currently happening and that's one of the issues that needs to be addressed if we're looking at a review of local government finance how we make that work in practice because just lecturing people and being disappointed in people for not delivering it isn't good enough. We need to be able to make sure it does happen. Excellent. Thank you very much and I'll now call on Cameron Buchanan six minutes or thereby ten. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Can I also welcome the new minister to his post and I hope to display the same charm and knowledge as his predecessor did. Shut up. I would also... Unparliamentary language time. I'd also like to start by saying that I too welcome this opportunity to discuss local government in Scotland. In particular, it is welcome that we're here to discuss the findings of a report concerning the flexibility and autonomy of local government. Often debates on these matters have been entirely focused on specific policy areas that, whilst important, avoid the overreaching questions about the role, position and power of local authorities. We Scottish Conservatives said in the report of the Strathclyde Commission that the centralisation of powers from local to central government should be reversed. This, Members, is the crux, I think, of the issue. Before going into debates about where power should lie and how best to work in local community's best interests, there is an important point to be acknowledged. Community engagement with local government, both democratically at elections and procedurally, I think is far below the level one would hope for. Indeed, the Scottish Community Alliance described attempts to engage communities in local government as an abject failure. We cannot ignore this and need to understand its underlying causes. Addressing disengagement should be a primary objective within desires to change the setup of local government. To highlight the scale of the disconnect here, we only have to compare the turnout in Scottish local elections to those in other European countries. Turnout in our local government elections in 2012 was rather pathetic 40%, whilst the figure was 60% in Germany in 2008 and is 72% in Denmark in 2013. These figures demonstrate that high turnouts can be achieved, as we've seen recently, and we do well to set out to improve our own figures. At the starting point, I look forward to the result of the Scottish Government's consultation on a range of other matters concerning voting habits. I think it's where, like in the referendum where it became relevant, people fought every voted count and in local elections people did, from our discussions we found that they didn't think their vote counted, as has already been discussed. Furthermore, disengagement of local politics is widespread with many people feeling terribly detached from the local government processes. The 2012 Scottish Household Survey found that only 21% of adults in Scotland agreed that they could influence decisions affecting their local area. A shocking figure and not good enough. The reporting questions highlight some of the issues that may be causing this disengagement, such as finding that some consultations by local authorities have perceived to be tokenistic and should be made more meaningful and indeed timely. Another point that the report draws attention to is the variety of associations involved in local politics and the inconsistency of their powers. What we have seen in our various discussions with community groups throughout Scotland when we've actually gone out to engage with the public is a variety, not in their powers, but in their names. These are called community council, residents associations, community trusts and even tennis associations. They all basically have the same aims. The point is that some of the disengagement from local politics possibly is due to its complexity and I think we have to recognise the inconsistency between the powers and the functions of community councils and other local organisations, which can make opportunities for members of the public to contribute far from obvious. The problem may not be the variety, but the rather lack of transparency that such variety can bring. Reform to make it clear where responsibility lies in each area would in my opinion help to restore widespread community engagement. This ties in actually with the reports point about consultations being tokenistic and thereby underlines the message that participation and clarity in local government is in need of improvement. Of course, one of the most important aspects of local government flexibility and autonomy is their finances, which has already been touched on. With local authority funding and expenditure in the current year expected to exceed 11.5 billion across the 32 local authorities, it is no small matter. We may be able to claim that there is a cross party consensus and that the present model of council funding through council tax, Scottish government grants, fees, business rates and other income needs to change. But a crucial decision on how to reform is yet to be made and I welcome the minister's cross party discussions on that. The options for adjusting the share raise by each of these funding avenues is certainly a topic of debate on one that I think we should enter into in this parliament. In this respect, the report has rather hit the nail on the head in saying that meaningful debate on alternative approaches to funding needs to happen in this parliament with the aim of having a new system in place by 2017 for local government elections. Having said this, I would like to make it clear that proper detailed debate needs to happen at all levels of public life before the report suggestion that local authorities should have the powers to raise some locally could be committed to. This is an option that amongst others should be looked at in considerable detail which is what the Scottish Conservatives will do. What I will say at the moment is that apparently favoured policy of the SNP to set up a local income tax I don't think would help and I think it would cause considerable difficulties. According to the Presiding Officer, I hope that my colleagues in this chamber will agree with me that we must accurately assess the present state of local authorities and local politics before embarking on programmes to reshape them. In this respect, a principal problem is voters' engagement and this has been caused by a number of factors which we have gone into. I will go more details into this report shortly as this has highlighted some important points whilst leaving room for constructive debate to take place amongst everybody else. Of course I reiterate that the central point to be discussed is how in the present climate we and the local authorities can work together to reverse the centralisation of powers. Any thanks. We now move to the open debate. Six minute speeches and I call on Stuart Stevenson to be followed by Hugh Henry. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. I've been a member of a political party now for 53 years and I'm going to say some things that are perhaps a negative about the involvement of political parties when you get close to communities. Let me just visit a little bit of history. In 1831, the number of electors in Scotland for parliamentary elections was less than 3,000. Therefore, the connection with the wider community was all but nil. Incidentally, we tend to forget that in the 1832 Great Reform Act, that removed the right of female persons to vote in parliamentary elections, although it left them subject to the property qualification able to vote in council elections. We have quite a lot of interesting things in the history. We, of course, until the Pontifrat by-election which took place on 15 August 1872, we actually voted by going up to the front of the returning officer and saying what candidate we were going to vote for. Indeed, the results of your vote were published. I have with me the Blofield district which happens to be near Norwich. It was the only one I could readily find. It shows that in 1871, parliamentary by-election there, James Bond voted Tory, I can tell you. His neighbour in the electoral role, John Bailey voted Wigg. It's all recorded here. Of course, in these circumstances, democracy worked in a substantially different way from the way it worked once the 1872 Ballots Act came into operation and was first run in 1872. That's actually a relatively recent history because all my grandparents were already born by the time of the Pontifrat by-election. So a lot has changed in recent times. Indeed, it's as well remembered in the 20th century as well. When Churchill lost his seat in 1922 in the general election he at that point had been an MP for Dundee. Dundee elected two members in a single first pass the post ballot. It was actually first and second pass, even though you'd only one vote elected two members. My mother first voted. She had two votes because if you were a university graduate you had a vote for a university MP as well as for your own constituency member and indeed the university vote was by single transferable vote which continued until the 1950 general election. So quite a lot changes and continues to change but what kind of effect does it actually have on people's engagement and the answer is as far as I can make out almost none. I look at international comparisons and the figures I've was able to conveniently find which cover a period from 1960 to 1995 arbitrary but probably useful. The top of the league is Malta without compulsory voting who in that period had a 94% turnout. Helpfully the committee visited some Scandinavian countries in that same period. Denmark at 87%, Sweden had 86%. The UK had 76%. But interestingly the United States was down at 48%. Now I say that's interesting because the United States is a very different model of democracy that basically all power is held at the bottom of the heap and the states choose what powers to give back up to the top but in terms of engagement it doesn't seem to make any difference although instinctively I feel that model is one I would personally be a little bit more comfortable. Yes I will. Has the member considered the models of town hall democracy very common in New England in the levels of participation that that affords and perhaps will he be arranging another local government committee fact finding trip? I think some of the smaller communities perhaps in the west Indies or the Indian Ocean would be the appropriate place to go but as I'm only a substitute member to be left guarding the gates back here. Now we talk about turnout going down. Well it's actually quite interesting that if we look at the 1945 general election at those who could vote the turnout was 70.05% and in 1997 it was almost identical at 69.39 so what motivates people to vote is something perhaps quite subtle and I think the high turnout that we've just had in the referendum may be because people felt they could change the system which they wanted to do rather than simply change the faces which they were perhaps less interested in doing. Now I've got some useful proposals perhaps that I know the committee hasn't considered that might for local elections in particular we talked about randomising the order of people on the ballot paper there's a much easier way of doing it have circular ballot papers so that you just turn it around so nobody's at the top and nobody's at the bottom and that would work. Now it's comparatively recent certainly since I first voted we didn't used to have the party designational and description on the ballot paper and I wonder if in local elections particularly would be helpful if you actually only voted for people you actually knew free from any influence of party. I say that as a member of a party for 53 years. Now finally officer one of the things the committee does deal with which I just will close on at the issue of postcode lottery I'm actually in favour of variability in delivery meeting core requirements but not expecting every community to do the same things we need strong messages that reinforce that throughout Scotland if we want people to be engaged. Many thanks. Many many thanks. I now call on Hugh Henry to be followed by Clare Adamson. I want to come back to the point that Stuart Stevenson finished on about variability of service delivery because I actually think that it's at the heart of this debate but one of the problems that we've got with what's in front of us today is we're talking about flexibility and autonomy in local government rather than flexibility and autonomy in the delivery of local services because it's not just local government that's fundamental to the delivery of critical local services in local communities we actually have a swath of other public institutions and organisations that are beyond local accountability and democracy and yet are absolutely as vital to those local communities as local councils and health is but one example where we have health boards which are completely remote from the lives of the individuals that they serve health boards which are accountable to the centre and yet they have to interact on a daily basis with councils which are accountable to local communities certainly I like the direction of travel of the member let me say that by this initially does he suggest however that therefore there is a case for aligning a series of administrative boundaries that cover different services off which the health board might be one I think that that would be something to welcome because there is confusion and there is clutter the other organisation that I was going to mention there what we call the alio is the arms length bodies now I think that there are good reasons my councils have set up such bodies there are financial imperatives in very tight times that enable councils to public bodies to make savings but as Willie Coffey and others who sat on the public audit committee will know there are concerns about the democratic accountability of those alios that are responsible for huge sums of money and also there's a confusion where councillors who sit on the boards of these alios are not quite clear whether their responsibility is to the council or to the alio and yet as an independent legally constituted body they must be responsible purely to the alio but there is that torn identity which I think often causes confusion so we need to find some ways of introducing a more democratic construction there as well Kevin Stewart I thank Mr Henry for giving way and I don't disagree with him and there was points Presiding Officer and one of the easiest ways of resolving that would be if this Parliament had control of things like VAT and was able to deal with a rate situation which is currently governed by the Westminster Parliament then there would be no need to set up these alios for savings Thank you Henry Well actually not necessarily because that would suggest that there's a completely different construction of how the VAT system in Scotland would work it's the existence of VAT that is the issue and not necessarily which body controls it but there is also another issue and I don't mean to be critical either of the committee or the individual members and indeed my Labour colleagues sitting on that committee but there's a tension at the heart of all of this earlier this week Tavish Scott made a contribution in the debate on the Smith commission where he posed questions about the centralisation of this Parliament and drawing more and more away from local communities now I remember the debate ahead of the foundation of this Parliament and the differences were given that this Parliament would not centralise we would not take powers and responsibility away from local communities and yet the opposite has happened and I'm not criticising the present administration because it has happened since the creation of this Parliament and there is a tension also where individuals and individual members like me will complain about what we call the postcode lottery services and to avoid a postcode lottery inevitably would mean the implementation of the consistency of service delivery across the country and yet that undermines fundamentally what we are talking about local communities and local councils being responsible earlier on yesterday there was a debate in some mention today about teacher numbers and class sizes in Labour has also Bibi was reminding me did things like we talked about class size numbers we talked about staffing levels in S1 and S2 for maths in English and yet inevitably that and what the SNP is doing in early years takes power away from local authorities why should we not allow a successful local authority for example like East Renfisher to determine how best to deliver its services and be held accountable to its electors if it fails to deliver no thanks a consistent and top quality local service now we need to make our mind up do we value as the committee report has said and other speakers have said do we want local government to become more accountable to its electors or do we simply want to determine and dictate what the services and the standards will be from the Scottish Parliament there are contradictions there are inconsistencies and we need to make our mind up whether we want a vibrant healthy functional democratic accountable series of local councils throughout Scotland or do we want to say a boy act suggested simply organisations that administer and deliver what we at the centre are dictating and until all of us right across parties decide what the answer is and until we sort out our contradictions then we will make no advance in getting truly accountable democratic local organisations many thanks I now call on Claire Adamson to be followed by Willie Rennie six minutes please can I thank the convener of the local government committee and the previous members of that committee which I joined last week the extensive work in this area and the report they have produced that we are debating this afternoon having not taken part in the deliberations surrounding the report and by no means an expert on that area however I was very interested in the five strands as outlined by the convener and how that work was approached I think it was very important specifically the areas especially in the island communities that are accommodated within local government structures and the fact that one of those strands was to consider the level of legal flexibility and autonomy for the central government which local government enjoys both the convener and the minister in their opening speeches mentioned the commission and indeed Sarah Boyack did as well on strengthening local democracy and their report effective democracy reconnecting with communities on page nine has seven principles for a stronger democracy in Scotland and I commend these to the chamber I won't be able to discuss them all in detail but I think the principle of sovereignty lying with the people the principle of subsidiarity the decision should be taken close to the communities as possible the third principle of transparency in the decision making process principle four is on the participation of communities and community engagement in any development processes five is about the spheres of governance and a change that local government should work independently and in a cooperative way rather than a top down dictative manner with engaging with local people and the final principle of wellbeing being at the heart of the decision making process I think all of these principles set out a very strong argument for how we should be going forward having not taken part in the deliberations with regard to the report I thought that perhaps I could best use my time this afternoon by aligning a local project that I think typifies what could be achieved if this is achieved throughout the whole of Scotland and indeed this project might even be enhanced by some of the proposals that have been brought forward in the bill as a local government councillor I represented the area of Gouthrapple that's one of the oldest place names in Scotland it means Cuckoo's throat it's an area that hasn't had its troubles to seek features in the 15% of the most deprived areas in the Scottish index of multiple deprivation and as a result has the typical problems that you'd expect from poverty low employment it's also recently had the advantage of a strong Polish community coming into the area but obviously there's been some challenges that that has brought with it too nonetheless in November I was delighted to be invited along by the big lottery fund Scotland's Celebrating Communities event where Gareens people housing co-operative where demonstrating some of the work they had done in their centre point in the Gouthrapple area the co-operative is a industrial and provident society it's fuel and mutual co-operative it owns 256 properties in Whishaw and is registered under the housing regulator and it is responsible for the running and day to day ownership of the Gouthrapple community hub centre point centre point was a partnership project along with North Lanarkshire Council the big lottery fund the Scottish Government, Clydesdale Bank and Gareens people's housing co-operative and they came together with a very tight brief for a new single story building to meet the needs of the local residents but obviously to offer a large amount of regeneration and support to that community the new building houses offices for Gareens housing co-operative it also has North Lanarkshire council offices available it's a locally run cafe pre and after use school care it houses a corner shop and a local pharmacy as well and it also has flexible meeting rooms for use by a variety of local groups and it features on the Reath website as an example of a very innovative design for this kind of project it received a grant of £885,000 the big lotteries growing community assets fund which helped finance the project and the other funding was provided by North Lanarkshire council by the housing co-operative Scottish Government as well it's owned and managed by the housing co-operative but very much to the benefit of the local people on its launch we invested in a community which we knew had an enthusiasm and drive and determination to make things happen now two years along you were returning to the committee report I was trying to give an example of the type of project that the committee report is referring to when it's talking about the importance of empowering local people and I think this is very important that it's not we can talk about it the figures and the facts and what local democracy means but if we have an example of that in action it brings it home to the people in the chamber that being said I would like to highlight a particular young volunteer Patrick Tupolsky who is a member of the Polish community who not only was one of the nine salt higher awards from this project in the local community from young volunteers but it was instrumental in doing a number of projects to integrate the Polish community with the people in Gouthrapple so I'm very glad that this report is here that the work has been done by the local government committee and I look forward to deliberation on the bill in the coming year and I now call on Willie Rennie to be followed by Stuart Birmillor I always enjoy coming into the chamber when I see Stuart Stevenson about to take his seat because I know we're going to get another history lesson this time over a 200-year period which I found very enjoyable and entertaining I was only disappointed that the most profound recommendation he could come up with was circular ballot papers I expected something much more significant than that but his comments on the postcode lottery were also chimed by Hugh Henry I thought they were both very good contributions I think that balance between making sure that we've got the kind of standards we were on a national basis as well as giving real local power and democracy do we want local administrators or do we want real democracy that's the challenge that we have got and I think Hugh Henry put that across in an excellent way and something that I will reflect on however I do disagree with him in one regard I think when the kind of desire for politicians centrally to do away with clutter and confusion I think is misguided I think government in general is quite confusing and complex what we need to have is clear lines of responsibility and make sure government operates effectively if we just want clean maps clean lines then I think we will undermine the effect on this of democracy so I don't think clearing up clutter and confusion if you want to describe that way is the overriding objective it's effective government with real local power is what I would argue is the objective in mind I think it's being referred to by Sarah Boyack about Lord Smith's recommendation or his reference and his opening remarks of the report have done us a service because we've gone through quite a monumental debate over the last three years I think now is the turn of local government to get that kind of big debate where we are really discussing what kind of local democracy how effective we want that to be at a local level there were two big winners of the referendum the votes at 16 and 17 people at that age group were the big winners but also the island communities were the other big winners I would like the third big winner to be local government so we can have a real constitutional reform within Scotland because we know the context and Kevin Stewart is right when he talks about the ring ffencing in the early days of the SNP government and that was a welcome thing it was something that was required to give local authorities much more flexibility I have to say the record since has not been as promising members will know my views about the police and the fire service being centralised and I think the real test on that in terms of local policing plans was when Highland Council declared that they didn't want the nationwide policy on the arming of police just in a second didn't want it to be applied in Highland and the chief constable was able to ignore that demand that council vote that expression of local democracy was ignored by the chief constable and I think that proves that we don't have local police services with local accountability anymore just in a second I think it's important to reflect that if we are going to have truly local democracy it must mean something at those critical points and I'll take an intervention from Kevin Stewart Kevin Stewart I thank Mr Rennie for giving way, he's given one example Mr Finlay and I actually visited Elgin very recently as part of the justice subcommittee on policing and one of the things which we discussed there was the actual ward policing plans and the Elgin community council and other community activists who were there we tried to get them to give us one bad example in that plan and they would not and could not because it was the plan that they wanted in place with their priorities surely that is true community democracy I'm sure there are good examples of where it works it did work in the past when the local police officers turned up to the local community councils and were able to have proper engagement so that was there already in practice so there will be good examples I'll give that to Kevin Stewart but there is a feeling within local government that power has been stripped away that local authorities don't have the authority that they once had in the past I do commend the committee's report because they did draw on a range of evidence from different bodies including the Conservative party's commission the white paper I was only sorry they weren't able to read the Campbell commission report so I'm going to give the committee a little bit of a flavour of what was in the Campbell commission because it was actually good work about trying to change local authorities for the better we recommended that the same principle that should be applied to the Scottish Parliament that this Parliament raises the majority of the money that it spends that that should also apply to local government so that they should have the same flexibility and accountability and responsibility at a local level and that means freeing up the council tax it means allowing the local setting of the business rates it means that we are able to get the majority of the money that is spent by local authorities raised by local authorities we also recommended that there should be the creation of new borough councils not additional authorities to replace massive reorganisation we're not proposing that we're proposing that where communities are allowed to create a borough council to run services within their community then they should be allowed to do so with a preset from local government allowing a break up and I think that chimes with some of the things that the committee have been saying that local authorities should not just be one homogenous mass that they should be allowed to have much more flowering of their local democracy so I commend the committee's report I think there's not a lot more work that requires to be done in this area but that's a big debate about the reform of local democracy Thank you and I call Stuart McMillan to be followed by Ann McTaggart Thank you very much First of all I want to welcome Marko Biagi to his role as minister If this debate took place a couple of weeks ago I would have still been a member of the local government and regeneration committee but I wanted to speak today because of my involvement in the inquiry and the work that is being done in this particular report I also wanted to place in record my sincere thanks and appreciation to my former colleagues on the committee but also for the committee clerks I think the clerks of this committee do a huge amount of work in an area that has a wide policy reach and they are always willing to assist and I would actually have to say that they go out with their way to assist and I for one appreciated their assistance and I know that the new members Claire Adamson and Willie Coffey are working team I welcome the report and I also concur with the comments of Kevin Stewart when he spoke about the issue of the centralising agenda and the lack of it and itself with it being changing I think the issue of the reduction in the ring fferencing of funds from a huge £2.7 billion in 2007 down to just over £200 million in 2013-14 there are occasions where I understand the politics why there is a claim of a centralised agenda taking place and the reduction in ring fferencing highlights the exact opposite actually has been in operation furthermore there has been a change in how government and local authorities actually work together there's a more joined up working taking place and that can be seen from legislation that's actually passed through this parliament which has actually enabled authorities to work differently than before I think a good example of this actually would be the introduction of self-directed support but in my opinion politicians no matter their colour are custodians of the public purse and they should always be attempting to get the best value for the public pound and we need to work to serve the public to enable them to actually access the best services possible and within the finite resources of the Scottish Parliament the best actually has been made in making changes to self-delivery but I think we would all agree that there is still more still a long way to go but despite the budgetary pressures due to Westminster cuts local government actually has been treated fairly under this SNP government the local government finance settlements have been maintained across the 2012 to 2016 period on a like for like basis with extra money for new duties and this resulted in a total settlement of over 10.6 billion pounds in 2014-15 and that is proposed to increase throughout the current budget process to almost 10.8 billion pounds in 2015-16 this was actually reflected also in last year's vote in the local government settlement where no member opposed the funding package to local authorities between 2007-8 and 2013-12-13 the resources within the Scottish Government's control increased by 6.4% over the same period local government's budget increased by 8.9% demonstrating the strong financial settlements agreed with local government during challenging financial times much of the work that we undertook as a committee certainly wasn't in isolation the local government committee in the course of this session they've undertaken a number of inquiries regarding the public services reform of the strand 1 the partnerships and outcomes strand 2 benchmarking and performance measurement strand 3 developing new ways of delivering services as well as implications of procurement reform for public services and community regeneration every area of activity seems to fall into the realms of the other areas of local government and that highlights just how broad local government actually is and what it actually is doing and this report that we're talking about today obviously focuses on a few areas and I want to touch upon just an issue can a one part of it in strand 1 and that's going to pose a question on this as well and that's just the issue of it does size actually matter and is it how many councils how many councillers or wards do we actually need Scotland has a lower number of councillers per head of population and it certainly was a legitimate area to actually consider and we can read articles highlighting how good local government is elsewhere and sometimes that can cloud the judgments about what we actually have however with the multi-member wards that we now have but also with the improved working partnerships with other bodies taking place as a consequence of the health and social care integration act agenda and also the use of the community planning partnerships the committee considered that structural change to local government at this time should not happen the evidence was clear that apart from academia and COSLA people were less concerned about the number of councils the size of the wards etc as compared to the actual services that have been delivered to them and their communities as well as the level of dialogue they actually have with their representatives I note that Willie Rennie's comments a few moments ago regarding the referendum and the votes of 16 and 17 year olds and I absolutely agree with him in terms of the significant increase in political engagement that's actually taken place and it's something that we certainly need to ensure continues going forward but certainly part of the issue here is to show how the impact that local authorities have on people's everyday lives whether it's in their child's education a clean out environment protection for the vulnerable is actually maintained but that's certainly in closing, Presiding Officer because I'm conscious of the time I do actually welcome the support but also welcome today's debate and I know that the work of the committee will continue to aid the debate on the issue of flexibility and autonomy in Scotland's local government Many thanks I now call Ann McTaggart to be followed by Willie Coffey Thank you Presiding Officer I'm particularly pleased to contribute to this debate being a member of the local government and regeneration committee and I would like to thank and congratulate my colleagues within the committee and also again to our wonderful clerking team of which this is us having now released our eighth report I'm sure the clerking team will take a well-earned rest I'm hopeful that the recommendations including in this report will inform the decisions made by the greater Parliament on how to promote flexibility and autonomy for local government even at its lowest levels I believe that I know I shared in some degree with most of the people in this Parliament is that on many issues government is best when it is local Particularly as Scotland prepares to receive more devolved powers from the Westminster Government we should also be thinking what powers should move down from us to local authorities and then again even further from local authorities to the community level Is this report the committee cites a statement from the president of COSLA and I quote power should lie at the most appropriate level sometimes it is appropriate for it to be at community level sometimes at the local authority level and sometimes at the national level unquote In seeking to follow the suggestion the committee set out a series of five strands which we took on and explored in our workload each of these strands represented the important areas that require some sort of determination about where power should lie In each of the cases the desire is to move power as close to the community as it is appropriate and enable local authorities to do so also One particularly important area where we made suggestions in relating to the level of public engagement and interaction with local government including turnout and local elections The committee found that low levels of public engagement and local politics largely came from the lack of a relationship that citizens and communities have with their local governments Part of Certainly I thank Ms McTaggart for giving away, Presiding Officer and while we have had some bad examples in the country of poor community engagement the committee has also experienced some good Dundee for example Would she agree with me that some local authorities have got some lessons that they could learn from Dundee and what they are doing in terms of community engagement? Ms McTaggart Yes, I most certainly would agree with Kevin Stewart that there are areas that most certainly do we could be learning lessons from Part of this is the powers held by community authorities are not those which community members believe most affect them To this end I agree with the recommendation in the report that powers be moved to the lowest appropriate level However, part of moving power closer to the communities is about seeking to engage them in decisions This is also brought up in the report In this way, not only are community members being engaged by simply having issues of importance put under the authority of the community bodies but these bodies must also actively engage citizens This creates two mechanisms of engaging people in the works of local government The second area that we recommend for reform is the process by which local authorities and community government gets its funding namely moving away from current council tax system Instead, within the life of this Parliament steps should be taken to create a new system for taxation prior to the local government elections of 2017 This would best be done through an independent cross-party commission The goal here which I support is to fix a broken system and in the process use help from local authorities to determine what is appropriate for them This is inclusive and not top-down direction Going hand in hand with the other two strains I have already mentioned is the desire to outline a better way to guarantee the legal flexibility and autonomy local governments have from central government Part of the committee's report which I would like to note is the recognition that structures put in place to affirm local control will be different throughout the country or even authority as it is seen for that area Final minute This strain is ultimately how devolving power to local government and indeed the whole notion of local governments should be framed We must recognise that the future goal of the Scottish Parliament should be to move more power to the local authorities but this should not be impediment to any community Just as important to the strain of the report was the determination that we will not create a process and do not deem it appropriate to say who should do what Presiding Officer This is a local issue and we trust local authorities to devolve powers to the lowest appropriate level and in conclusion I am happy to see the release of this report from the local government and regeneration committee and offer my support to the areas that I have just spoken about Thank you I now call Willie Coffey to be followed by Alison Johnstone Very much Presiding Officer and of course to welcome our new minister Marko Biagi to be seated in the front bench I too am delighted to be able to contribute to this debate both as a new member of the local government committee and as a former councillor first elected in the grand old days of the early 1990s to Kilmarnock and Loudoun district council I have read over the committee's report and the Scottish government's positive response to it and must congratulate the members and former members for all their hard work they put into this Much of it comes as no real surprise to me though as a former councillor and perhaps the biggest surprise is why we have not yet found the keys to local empowerment that we all seem to want There are some really important messages in the report on empowerment accountability, flexibility and the desire to devolve budgets and equally there are some messages there about why some of this just hasn't happened over the years Internal cultural restrictions is a phrase that the convener used in his foreword and I think all of us former councillors recognise what he means by that I was interested to read the comments by Professor Jim Mitchell on whether councils need constitutional protection to give them that sense of security from abolition or reform and through that perhaps adopt a more robust approach to local innovation He said constitutional protection wasn't enough on its own though and I imagine those of us who have been there can see that it probably does require more than that to be able to embrace this empowerment agenda The report emphasises again and again the importance of empowering local people but it also recognises the slow progress in achieving it According to the report people want to be part of the decision making processes but often feel that consultation can be tokenistic because decisions have already been taken But what exactly then do we mean by empowerment? Is it just devolving decision making powers with some budgetary responsibilities thrown in? For me, I suspect many local people too and I think from the minister's opening remarks consultation isn't empowerment at all and neither is handing over a little power and a budget to work within It has to be more than that Real empowerment is where we give local people the freedom to innovate and drive forward ideas and solutions they may devise for themselves or at least feel they are genuinely shaping the decisions that their councils take Who says that our councillers and our officials are the ones who always know best? I particularly like to comment from the COSLA commission in paragraph 52 saying that we need a new ideology where democracy is designed from the bottom up This chimes with the comments from a constituent of mine who asked why can't we have a kind of people's convention where ideas can develop and mature turn them into policy and then be delivered by a receptive council that encourages a process like that As one witness to the committee said councils and to be fair governments too impose the changes they want on the people They devise capital programmes for housing, whether people need or want the particular upgrades that are on offer and they determine how local settlements are to develop through their local plans which are almost impossible for ordinary people to shape What would empowerment look like in these contexts? Perhaps local people could devise their own housing improvement needs agree the programmes they want and set up the contracts to deliver them Perhaps local people should determine how and whether their own communities should expand with more or less housing and industrial developments in their settlements Are these powers too dangerous to be left in the hands of our communities? Would we get inconsistency and would we get chaos? Or would we see a confident community emerging that valued that level of engagement and began to feel really empowered? The convener in his address also talked about our democratic structures and numbers of councils and councillors The public, as Stuart McMillan pointed out had no interest at all in the size or structures of our authorities but were more interested in having the ability to influence matters affecting their lives which again is an issue about real engagement and empowerment I do think that an opportunity was missed at the last review of local government which really did nothing other than to top up the councillor's salaries a bit but at the same time it was claimed that it would encourage wider participation in local government by a new breed of younger and perhaps more professional individuals becoming councillors that just didn't happen What we still have broadly is the same councillor profile that we've always had mostly older and retired men and younger councillors who still have to work in their day jobs to support their families I think our councillors have worked wonders given these constraints and the huge increase in their workload and obligations serving bigger council wards So, Presiding Officer if we want communities to be truly empowered we also need to help our councillors too and then cut them much better to engage with that task Perhaps we need to consider matching their salaries during their terms of office Perhaps our employers need to offer sabbaticals to allow them to serve their councils full time Not easy to do, I know but otherwise I think we will still struggle to see the kind of changes that we're hoping for Presiding Officer, the committee report has been fascinating to read It presents some familiar scenarios but offers some valuable insights into how we can deliver better local democracy for our communities I'm delighted to support the convener's motion to the Parliament and ask that we note an act on the contents of it Thank you Many thanks and our final open debate speaker is Alison Johnston Thank you Presiding Officer and I too would like to welcome Marco Biageta to his new ministerial role Throughout the referendum I consistently argued that new powers for Scotland shouldn't be about creating a many Westminster here in Edinburgh that we should be a Parliament that's brave enough and mature enough to devolve powers away from the centre and down to local authorities and beyond We have to realise that Scotland is the odd one out in Europe The scale of administrative centralisation here is literally off the chart in some of the reports I've seen and you could argue that local government in Scotland is a misnomer In the last 60 years there's been a 92% reduction in the number of local councils giving Scotland the most concentrated local government in the whole of Europe The mean population per council is 166,000 The EU average is 5.6,000 During the referendum the green yes campaign published a discussion paper with a plan for a system of smaller truly local councils each serving approximately 20,000 people These councils could be tied together by a larger strategic body and they'd be free to work together where that made sense Can I make some headway? But they would remain accountable and connected to their electors This is not written in stone green policy We're open to other reforms which will increase and empower local government But I am disappointed to see the committee's report rule out any form of structural change Stuart McMillan Thank you Alison Johnson for taking the intervention Can Alison Johnson please tell the chamber as to where the finance would come from to undertake this recommendation that she's purporting Alison Johnson I think when we see turnouts below 40% the last election in 2012 was the lowest turnout since 1975 a woeful 39% it really is time that we take action and I think the government has a duty to look at what might be required In 2007 the only local tax raising power left with Scottish councils was frozen Local governments now are largely treated like children a child has given pocket money to spend whereas an adult is allowed to earn a wage for their keep It is time that we treated local government with more respect and that we need to return a significant level of financial independence Our green local democracy paper suggests local governments should raise at least 50% of their own revenue through a range of tax raising powers such as land or property taxis My recent motion will allow councils to charge a visitor lefi if they so desire gain support from only one member outside the group The Smith commission has proposed assigning the first 10p of that to Scotland we could think of similar ways to fund regional administrations Local government could be given a fixed statutory share of national income tax for example 50% of proceeds raised by income tax could be guaranteed to municipalities and regional councils This would provide funding for public services based on population and an incentive to attract people to their area with local improvements The way council tax banding has left has been left to become incredibly out of date is completely unfair but a centrally imposed freeze is disempowering, unsustainable and I would argue has not been funded in real terms We urgently need to create a fairer reform tax Land value tax is our long established alternative and we'll look forward to engaging with the commission in 2015 but what is really needed is a crystal clear commitment from the government that these reforms will be implemented Land reform expert Andy Wightman authored a report for the green SPs in 2012 setting out how a land tax could work in Scotland He argues that land reform is still unfinished business in Scotland and land ownership continues to be rife with inequalities A land value tax would make those of Scots households better off tackle urban blight and land banking and stabilise the housing market The Scottish council of voluntary organisations also argue that local government shouldn't be where devolution stops They want to see more participative democracy where people are directly involved in decision making This is an important check and balance on power held in elected hands I thank Ms Johnson for giving way a lot of that movement and the power can be done already Mr Rennie gave the example of Ochtermachty There's nothing stopping Fife Council from giving the residents of Ochtermachty these powers It's just that that's not happening So it's not even about new powers it's about using the existing powers that they have Absolutely but I do think financial power is extremely important and I find it ironic that a government that is campaigned so vociferously for its own financial independence cannot see the need to devolve that power further The community empowerment bill is an important step on this journey but culture change is key SCVO say elected representatives need to nourish and support the role of community organisations not to see them as rivals I read the COSLA commission on strengthening local democracy and felt excited by the principles and the radical vision a radical vision of what local democracy should be like They believe that this radical change is worth fighting for and I thank the committee for the work that they have done but I do believe the report appears to close down some of the possibilities It appears to dismiss the input of COSLA and academia and I agree with Andy Wightman when he says that there's clearly a divide between those who think that democracy works just fine in Scotland and are content to pursue policies that undermine local democracy but I do that there is a need for fundamental reform of these democratic structures Post referendum devolution is being scrutinised as never before but it really is time that we give the same attention to double devolution Thank you Many thanks We now turn to the closing speeches and I call on Cameron Buchanan in six minutes please Sorry, thank you This afternoon's discussion should have raised some important and some contentious issues Whilst we may not all agree on how best reform local government is very welcome to hear from across the chamber some insistence on the need to take this debate further We have heard what some of the main issues are from public disengagement and lack of transparency in decision making processes to overarching tendencies towards centralisation However this report has offered some very useful insights into which our local government and regeneration committee can consider in detail Furthermore it is important that when considering the future of local government we look to examples of successful initiatives on which to build As we all know centralisation can come in many forms and it's no secret that this government has centralised power as the many disagreements about cosmon membership have shown There are other examples including the creation of Police Scotland that also to me set a worrying precedent of centralisation but these examples are a question for another day The point I am trying to make is that this report has been written at a time when councils are facing pressure from central government is within this context that we must consider reports recommendations Having said this, in my opinion the report is right to highlight that local authorities and cells have the ability to devolve power to all levels of government closer to local communities As my colleague Mr Stewart has touched on these organisations closer to communities can vary considerably from the residents association community development companies community trust to community councils and cells With 1,200 community councils in Scotland and an estimated 12,000 community councillors there are a considerable resource that is yet slightly untapped to their full potential and they also have great variation in their effectiveness With this in mind it is welcome that the report will expect local authorities to draw up schemes that have power exercised at the lowest appropriate level in all areas The key phrase here I think is the lowest appropriate level where it is appropriate that can vary both due to the powers involved and due to the particular circumstances of local communities With this in mind it is important that local authorities have the flexibility to work with local organisations to determine themselves what is the lowest appropriate level to devolve functions which takes me on to one of the key areas of the report the level of legal flexibility that local government enjoys It is right to highlight there is a perception of control by the centre in local authorities which could be addressed by greater flexibility This could come in the form of flexibility in determining where most appropriate level to place responsibility for local government is or in a number of other policies in practice where we in the parliament can help The report claims that whether a legislative barriers in place that prevent differentiation of services to meet local needs they should be removed exactly the sort of flexibility that can energise local government Of course I agree that call services such as education and social security should be provided universally Universal standards do not need to be enforced in all policy areas for example the economics of refuse collection services the frequency of them will vary depending on the area particularly of course in rural areas It is right to draw attention to this report and we should reinforce the point Furthermore we can also use the attention this chamber brings to highlight that as have been mentioned councils are often afraid to use the powers they have and they are very risk averse and more could be done to encourage them to do so to use the flexibility they already have which they have not probably realised Finally although this debate and the reporting question have focused on tensions between central government and councils and on the disconnect between local authorities and local communities this is not the whole story There are shining examples of success stories concerning partnership between central government and councils to achieve real results for local communities The most prominent example of this is city deals in particular for Glasgow In August the UK and Scottish governments announced that one billion was to be invested in Glasgow with 500 million from each and a further 130 million for Glasgow and the Clyde valley local authorities I think this example of the UK, Scottish and local governments co-operating to deliver massive investment is a model and I'm sure we all hope can be repeated Furthermore the city deal has highlighted that the UK government can have an important role it is clearly in everyone's interest to see that Scotland's community thrive As the Scottish Conservatives Strathclyde Commission commented that the coalition city deals programme is another example of how significant powers can be devolved closer to the citizens However there is a distinction here City deals are a partnership between levels of government rather than permanent devolution This does not diminish from the example but is important to remember According to Presiding Officer I would like to finish by expressing my hope that this report and our debate shed a new light on the issues of centralisation, flexibility and autonomy for local government It is an absolutely crucial issue for this country and deserves our unwavering attention A great number of important issues and potential solutions have been discussed here but I feel that it can all be summed up by one statement Local communities need their local authorities to have the flexibility to suit local interests and this Parliament should do all it can to allow this to take place Many thanks I now call on Alex Shiley Six minutes please Presiding Officer I also welcome the report by the local government and regeneration committee and I welcome the debate that has taken place today When speaking about local government I think it is important firstly to acknowledge the role and the importance of local government and the acknowledgement of the army of councillors of public servants that are out there delivering services day in and day out that impact on the lives of people across communities the length and breadth of Scotland and that is really important I was struck when and McTaggart talked about this being the eighth report of the local government committee and it made me think what impact and what difference did the other seven reports actually make and I'm sure that Kevin Stewart will tell me more about that but I think there is an opportunity to see this report really as the start of a debate and that the report can lead because at the same time as many others have mentioned we have the commission on strengthening local democracy that was chaired by COSLA so we have these two reports and as Alison Johnson said in her contribution that should not be lost I was the chairman of the finance committee and Fife regional council at the time of the last local government reorganisation and went on to be the leader of the first new Fife council and I'm well aware of the bureaucratic nightmare that a new structure and having to bring about reorganisation where Kevin Stewart says it would be a distraction my experience is that yes it would be but that should not be a reason for us not looking at how we actually do more the minister himself used the term blossom and if you read the book and I certainly have skimmed through a lot of that book we are certainly miles away from the vision that Leslie Riddock for example presents of Scandinavian countries and the type of local government that is there I have to confess that I haven't read the Campbell commission that Willie Rennie speaks about and I would welcome the opportunity to get a copy of that but his example of Otto Murte it's not quite as simple as Kevin Stewart would have us believe that simply the council in the case of Fife council could simply recreate the Borough of Otto Murte we need to engage and we need to we need to engage between the commission report coming out that was chaired by COSLA with this report and one of the big things that have come out of this report was the recommendation to look at how local government is financed that is a key issue going forward and I certainly welcome the fact that the Scottish government have said that they are now engaging with COSLA looking at a cross-party approach to how local government is financed and that must look as Sarah Boyack said much more widely than simply the council tax versus a local income tax versus some form of property tax we must look in much more detail and actually I think one of the contributors to the debate said that that discussion has to be much wider and it has to be a discussion with communities right across Scotland because at the end of the day it's the easiest thing in the world for any government to be able to take taxis and there are some countries in some governments who pride themselves on low levels of taxation but equally sitting alongside that is very low levels of public services and so let's have that debate much more widely than just in this chamber and much more widely than just the politicians the minister also talked about 16 and 17 year olds and having the vote and absolutely we should be united and I think we are in this chamber to try and get that power so that in 2016 we see 16 and 17 year olds getting the vote but also in the local government elections that are then following in 2017 just as on the side in terms of my own constituency I mentioned this yesterday there were three community councils just the last few weeks the turnout was around 22-23% but that was for a community council and one of the key things that came through in a lot of the evidence that the committee took was that in countries where you have stronger local government and you have stronger powers and people believe that there is a real strength to the local government then voting turnout is actually higher and therefore there needs to be lessons for that I personally take the view that there is a fourth tiery government in Scotland and it is community councils there is mixed views on that but actually if we look at and pern that fourth tier more and it's certainly something that should be debated as part of this wider discussion so the point there I think that has to be made is that we don't simply bury this report that we take this report as a starting point and set it alongside the commission and by using both those reports let's get that discussion going out there more widely about how we finance local government but also how do we take powers and take those powers down something that wasn't mentioned in much of the debate was the community planning partnerships and Hugh Henry talked about health for example and we now have health and social care so that's one area that actually needs to be wider discussion how do we hold those boards to account and how do we involve them when we've made the key point is it that we simply believe that it's about putting money to local authorities and telling them what to do or is it truly local government so that at the local level local elected people can make the decisions and then held to account for those decisions when they go back to the electorate and ask to be elected or not on their performance and that I think is the key debate that is coming out today but it's been a good debate let's now move forward and use these reports to talk about how we have true local democracy in the future many thanks and now Colin Mark would be adjate minister seven minutes please thank you Presiding Officer this has been quite an interesting debate in that we have very often touched on quite core philosophical democratic issues of principle one of the things I've heard most from the different sides has been the references to the 50-50 finance balance and that's something I'm sure we will continue to debate at length but what is quite interesting here is the linking of that with the commission and I would just put out a caution to consider that the commission may well best be served by focusing on how we deal with the pressing and very immediate problem of the council tax whereas the issue of the level of balance between Scottish Government, local communities is something that's always going to be an ongoing issue and that perhaps we shouldn't try and put too much on it but instead retain a narrow focus we've certainly opened to any discussions and we've heard views from COSLA on that but I would simply put that out there to keep our feet on the ground I would however before I move into all the things we do agree on and I've agreed with the contributions from many members I would have to go back to one quote from Sarah Boyack which is that the council's finances are most pressed since the Tory's era as a share of income right now as a share of the Scottish Government's budget councils are getting 36.4% now you don't have to go back to the Tory era to see a smaller figure you just need to go back to 2006-07 when it stood at 34.7% so as Stuart McMillan was very much at odds at pens to say there is financial pain here that is all round the Scottish Government has lost 10% of its budget in real terms and we should have a bit more of a realisation that local government front line services are proportionally doing rather well now the tax report has come up it's been referenced by Cameron Buchanan by Alex Rowley many others and I'm glad to hear that there is a consensus I wish to buy in I'm also glad to hear the comments about the importance of public engagement because it's not just enough for the five parties here in this chamber to engage with this to maybe even who knows agree and come to a consensus position it is also important that we hear from the public that the public participate and the public feel that this process is theirs as well and on that participation has been a bit of a theme I think Stuart Stevenson certainly put forward some very interesting points I always like to banday esoteric knowledge of Stuart Stevenson so I'll just point out that Lavinia Malcolm in 1907 was the first female town councillor some years before the votes were given to women in parliamentary elections which shows the possibility of innovation and participation sorry we can't hear you if you turn around participation in community level representation I would say to Stuart Stevenson that his example of a blow field and a James Bond as a voter may call into question the authenticity of his source and he should perhaps have another go at google searching Stuart Stevenson though touched on variability at the end which was a very interesting area that I think was developed more by Hugh Henry who I notice isn't in the chamber where we look at the issue of what happens if people fail and what happens in the differentiation of services this is at the core of what happens if we empower local democracy we've got to be aware that different communities have different desires and will create different structures while somehow reconciling that with the importance of universal services for example he cited childcare and East Renfrewshire and whether East Renfrewshire should for example be free to innovate that is one issue would we take the same approach would everyone who supported East Renfrewshire having freedom to innovate on childcare giving a council freedom to innovate on the NHS something that is cherished as a universal right wherever we are in the country Stuart McMillan I thank the minister for taking an intervention but would the minister agree that with the introduction of the benchmarking tool this actually will allow local authorities to innovate even more so because it can learn from positive lessons from elsewhere within the country and there are definite lessons learned from around the country I was in Highland on Friday on my first visit as minister for local government I wanted to go to one of the councils I know wants to have more engagement from Edinburgh and there I heard about some of the really interesting, really exciting innovation that's happening they are at ward level within their local authority a degree of delegated decision making that is really quite remarkable it almost suggests that the councils could be set up if you devolved to ward level and as the committee pointed out there is nothing to stop that happening there needs to be more sharing of these ideas Kevin Stewart While Highland Council have developed a ward budget system the committee itself the other week in Fort William heard from the people of Lochaber in the surrounding areas saying that they felt that on how those ward budgets were spent how do we deal with that kind of situation so that real people are involved Minister Indeed, that's where we get into the very complex system of what happens if you create the electoral structures but still have the barrier with popular participation I've pointed to participatory budgeting in my opening speech is something that I have great interest in and which offers a chance for the person on the street to make their views heard make it heard in a very intense way that is more than voting but perhaps less than having to sit on a committee that is an area I would like to see explored very widely by a range of councils around the country I was very pleased to hear perhaps more than the Presiding Officer and the Chair at the time of the example given by Claire Adamson from her constituency of Gouthrapple a very notable example because it shows the variation that there is the innovation, the potential it stemmed from a housing organisation there and that has been the anchor organisation for many of this I visited Govan Hill and have seen there that a community development trust anchored in the housing association has been able to achieve a level of community empowerment that many other communities would envy and also has done that despite great many challenges of different communities overlapping in the one locality what are communities there are people that share an interest that communicate with each other and that is not always the same as all the people that live in one area Presiding Officer to conclude I think power comes from those people the ordinary people who live in communities up and down this country our system of government however much we debate its detail, debate its structure we have to remember that is where power comes from that is who we are here to serve who we are here to represent and whose welfare and wellbeing we ultimately have to be concerned about Many thanks minister I now call on John Wilson to wind up the debate on behalf of the committee nine minutes please Mr Wilson Thank you very much Presiding Officer Can I first of all declare my interest in this matter not only as a committee member and the deputy convener I will check my register of interest I am also involved in a community organisation that is actively involved and engaged in real community empowerment within the community I live in Can I thank all the members who have participated in this debate today but in particular I would like to thank the witnesses who provided us with oral evidence while we considered this report as well as those who provided written evidence and I would also put on record thanks to those community representatives who gave us evidence because I think what we took as a committee was quite clear evidence from communities as we have tried to do in all the work we have done as a committee is speak to the communities involved not just the officials not just the elected members and not the academia and other agencies we tried to get to the grassroots to find out what their reality is in terms of some of the things that are going on this report has been produced in tandem with a number of reports and you have heard today this is the eighth report being produced in this session by the committee the committee has done this work in relation to the community empowerment legislation that is coming forward and a lot of the issues that have been identified in the report will mirror and reflect the issues that have been dealt with in the other areas of work that we have carried out leading up to this report and will continue to influence recommendations in terms of the community empowerment bill having said that a number of contributions that have been made and I welcome Markleby Agente's new role as a minister and look forward to a fruitful relationship between the minister and the committee and taking forward some of the issues that we have identified the committee is a unique committee and in terms of when the report was done out of the seven members on the committee five of them have served as elected members in local government in various capacities they have served as opposition members but also some have served as being in majority administrations so I think that that helps shape the report that you see before you today in terms of the work that is done in the committee because we have or many of us had practical experiences of dealing with not only decision making structures within local authorities but also dealing with communities and the reality in terms of what communities would like to see happening but the minister quite clearly gave an indication that he welcomed the report that was produced and looks forward to taking forward some of the issues identified and also make reference to some of the areas that were raised by some of the witnesses we took evidence from and in amongst that were the issues quite clearly about allios and the concerns about the democratic accountability of allios but also made reference to the issue in terms of the island areas working group that has been established by the Scottish Government and we look forward to some of the developments that come from that and I think that quite rightly identified the debate that took place in terms of around the referendum and the issue about double devolution and if we want devolution and greater powers for this Parliament then we need to really look forward to greater powers for local government as well but I think the members have to look carefully at the report because we are not just talking about greater powers for local government we are talking about greater powers for communities and many respects local government does not automatically equate to communities and I think that's the message that we as a committee are trying to get over as we have to make sure that when we're engaging with talking about devolution of power we have to be clear that we're talking about devolution of power to the grass roots and that's within communities and it might be the often must be example that Willie Rennie spoke about but we have to look at new and challenging ways of actually taking forward a brief intervention Sarah Boyack I very much agree with the member and in fact suggested that it was devolution from councils to local communities which is why I wanted to refer in the Crown Estates Commission which could go down very much to local communities in terms of licensing issues and not just be held by local authorities John Wilson I think there are opportunities afforded to us to look at those issues and take them forward but as I said at the heart of all this is about ensuring that communities feel actively engaged Cameron Buchanan raised a number of issues in terms and he raised the issue about engagement with communities and how we engage with them in terms of Stuart Stevenson it's always interesting listening to Stuart Stevenson and getting a history lesson about the voting system in 1872 unfortunately we don't go as far and he gave an example of Malta of a population of 400,000 with a 94% turnout maybe that's because they feel closer to government than we do in Scotland and in terms of these proposals in terms of circular ballot papers I'm sure we'll take that up with some of the commission and also others to actually look at that issue Hugh Henry raised quite clearly issues about the report but in terms of some of the issues he raised with reference to paragraphs 142 and 143 of the report and that might answer some of the concerns it has as I said in terms of Stuart McMillan we've actually got the issue about the public pound chasing the public pound but it's about communities understanding what the public pound can do for them and how they are engaged in making those decisions in terms of the other issues Wally Coffey in terms of talking about consultation being tokenistic then quite clearly that is one of the feelings that we've picked up as a committee from speaking to many community representatives that there is engagement there is decision making structures but for many they just feel the decision has already been made the consultation is tokenistic and the local authorities are already going to do what they're going to do anyway so it is about trying to ensure that local government actually meaningful consultation, deliberation and the evidence that they've actually taken on board the views and issues that have been expressed by communities Alison Johnston raised the issue about the relationship with COSLA and academia and could I refer to paragraph 40 of our findings because clearly there are issues and there are continuing issues for the committee to engage with particularly COSLA and get evidence from COSLA evidence no matter where it comes from but when it sometimes gets blocked and sometimes we don't get the evidence that we're seeking then the difficulty is how we then represent that in our reports so it is about trying to engage with everyone in this process and ensure that we get what we present to Parliament is the views of the wider society and that includes COSLA and academia the issues in terms of taking this forward Presiding Officer and as I said we look forward to working with the minister and taking the report forward and other issues forward but particularly I would like to make reference to Alec Rowley's comment about community council elections in the 20 to 22 percent turnout in our community council election I think what we're actually saying is a greater involvement of communities because of the referendum that people want to get actively involved can I remind them that in 2012 some local government ward election results actually the turnout was less than 22 percent so if we're getting a 22 percent turnout for community council elections then I think society is moving forward and there is greater engagement if people want that engagement Finally Presiding Officer what I want to realise is the perception versus reality we may think we are doing things right we may think we are fully engaging with communities but the reality for many of the communities that we spoke to around Scotland is they still feel left behind they feel excluded and they feel ignored and we've got to make sure as a parliament and as local government we engage fully with the communities forward the policies that they want and they desire Thank you That concludes the local government and regeneration committees debate on flexibility and autonomy in local government We now move to the next side of business which is a statement by John Swinney on the local government finance settlement 2015-16