 The next item of business is a debate on motion 3394 in the name of Tom Arthur on local government finance Scotland order 2022, and I would invite those members who wish to speak in the debate to please press the request to speak buttons now, and I call on Tom Arthur Minister to speak to and to move the motion. Around seven minutes, please. Presiding Officer, the purpose of today's debate on the local government finance order is to seek Parliament's approval to the guaranteed allocations of revenue funding to individual local authorities for 2022-23. It also seeks agreement to the allocation of additional funding for 2021-22, which has been identified since the 2021 order was approved on 18 March last year. First, to put the local government settlement in the context of the overall Scottish budget, it should be noted that the independent Scottish Fiscal Commission concluded that the overall Scottish budget in 2022-23 is 2.6 per cent lower than in 2021-22. After accounting for inflation, the reduction is 5.2 per cent. Despite that reduction, the 2022-23 local government finance settlement provides an additional 9.2 per cent or a real-terms increase of 6.3 per cent compared to 2021-22. For the avoidance of doubt, that increase does not include the £280 million that the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Economy announced during stage 3 of the budget bill debate on 10 February and will enable local authorities to make cost of living awards of £150 per cent to their most vulnerable council tax payers. If it is a brief intervention, please, Mr Cole-Hamilton. I am very grateful to the minister for giving me away. He is doing a grand job of spinning this settlement, but I wonder if he has spoken to his fellow ministers, Lorna Slater, Oben MacPherson, who were utterly eviscerated on Friday's COSLA conference for the reality of what that means for local cuts. I have to respond to the member by repeating the remarks that I just made, which is to set the context, which is that we are facing a 5.2 per cent reduction in our overall budget, and the reality is, and I am sure that he will correct me if I am wrong later in the debate, but I do not recall Mr Cole-Hamilton identifying budget lines for reduction to be reallocated to local government. Perhaps, if he wants to reflect on that, come our budget process for next financial year, later in the year, he can make a constructive contribution. The settlement builds on the 2021-22 local government finance settlement. That provided an increase in local government day-to-day spending of £375.6 million compared with the previous year. In 2022-23, including the additional £120 million of general uplift announced at stage 1 of the budget bill, the Scottish Government will provide councils with a total funding package worth almost £12.7 billion. That includes revenue funding of £12 billion and support for capital expenditure of almost £0.7 billion. It is important to note that the total of the funding package is already finalised following the passing of the Scottish budget bill. Today's debate seeks Parliament's approval for the distribution of this approval total funding to individual local authorities. The order seeks approval for the distribution and payment of £11.4 billion out of the revenue total of £12 billion, with the balance mainly made up of specific grant funding, which is administered separately. The £11.4 billion is the combination of general revenue grant of almost £8.4 billion and the distributable amount of non-domestic rates income, which has been set at almost £2.8 billion. In addition to the 2022 order, the 2022 order includes £250 million of the cost of living that was further mentioned earlier, with a further £30 million to be included for approval in the 2023 order, subject to final reconciliation of the actual payments made by local authorities. The settlement not only provides local authorities with an additional £1 billion for vital day-to-day services and the flexibility to increase council tax rates that are appropriate for their local authority area, but also provides continued fiscal certainty that does not exist in England through our policy of guaranteeing the combined general revenue grant plus non-domestic rates funding set out in this order. That means that any loss of non-domestic rate income resulting from the impact of Brexit or Covid-19 will be compensated for by increased general revenue grant, unlike the position for councils in England, effectively underwriting this critically important revenue stream. As approved as part of the Scottish budget, the overall funding package for 2022-23 includes real terms growth to the overall settlement, an increase of £120 million in the core budget and cash terms, £353.9 million previously announced for health and social care integration, an additional £200 million to support investment in health and social care, £145 million for additional teachers and support staff, £68.2 million for child registering payments, £100 million for 100-day commitments, including scrapping curriculum, music tuition charges and expanding scale clothing grant and an extra £64 million revenue and £30 million of capital funding to support the expansion of free-scale meals. Although it is not explicitly within the settlement itself, agreeing to this order also ensures that the funding to protect against increases in the cost of living finds its way into the pockets of households of the length and breadth of Scotland. It remains what a further £124 million of revenue funding that will be distributed once the necessary information becomes available and will be included for approval in the 2023 order. In addition to the revenue funding contained within today's order, there is specific revenue funding that is paid directly by the relevant policy areas under separate legislation, amounting to almost £785 million. The 2022 order also seeks approval for £840.7 million of changes to funding allocations for 2021-22. The full list of changes can be found in the report to the 2022 order. The funding includes almost £256 million to address Covid-19 pressures. Taken together with the additional £259 million that was included in funding that was approved by Parliament on 18 March last year and the £1.2 billion that was approved in the previous financial year, that brings the value of the overall Covid-19 support package for councils up to over £1.7 billion over and above their regular grant payments. The Scottish Government has also replaced almost £1.7 billion worth of non-domestic rate incomes for the cause of Covid reliefs with additional general revenue grants since the start of Covid. The budget bill ensured that total funding from the Scottish Government to local government next year amounts to almost £12.7 billion. That represents an increase of over £1 billion or 9.2 per cent in cash terms. That is a real-terms increase of 6.3 per cent compared with 2021-22. The order confirms the distribution to individual councils and the proposals reflect the key role that local government will play as we focus on how we can lift children out of poverty, invest in social care and tackle climate change. The Scottish Government will continue to work in partnership with local government to improve outcomes and ensure that communities receive the lifeline support and services that they expect and deserve. I now move that Parliament approves local government finance Scotland order for 2022. I call on Miles Briggs to speak on behalf of the Scottish Conservatives. This is an important debate and not just a technical one. I want to open my contribution today by thanking all those who work in our local authorities across Scotland for their hard work, especially going the extra mile during the pandemic. Local government finance order 2022 comes at the tail end of the budget process. Given that we have spent weeks now debating the Scottish Government tax and spending choices, it might seem at this point that there is little more to add. Nevertheless, it is important that the parliamentary process of today highlights and gives opportunity for all of us to highlight what needs to change. The order before us allocates funding to each of Scotland's 32 local authorities. We do not intend to oppose it, as that would simply deprive local government of much-needed resources for the coming year, but we have serious concerns about the overall allocation of resources to local councils across Scotland. As has already been mentioned, I attended the COSLA conference on Friday alongside other spokespeople, including Alex Cole-Hamilton. It is fair to say that SNP and Green Ministers were left in no doubt of how council leaders and councillors across the country feel about this settlement. Councils have yet again been left in a situation where they have to find savings or cut local services. It is a simple fact that SNP and Green Ministers have cut local council budgets next year by £251 million in real terms. The cut to local government finance has been carried out despite Scotland receiving a record £41 billion block grant from the UK Government. It is decisions taken by SNP and Green Ministers to cut budgets. We know that councils across Scotland have joined together to condemn those cuts. As COSLA President Alison Everson said, it is beyond frustrating that the importance of local government's role in enabling communities to live well locally across Scotland has not been reflected in the budget announcement. I am grateful to Mr Briggs for giving way. He described the settlement as the record settlement, but that is not consistent with the Scottish Fiscal Commission. It has indicated that there is a 5.2 per cent reduction to the Scottish budget. Who is right, Mr Briggs, for the Scottish Fiscal Commission? I think that the minister will be acutely aware that councils have very limited options to meet that cut. It is one of the key parts of this debate that I believe that the Scottish Government has to realise that when they cut budgets it hits the most vulnerable in our communities and is damaging to the local government workforce as well. For example, the only options that my council here in the capital have to try to make up this reduction is around a tourism tax, which the SNP said they would never introduce, or the new car park tax, which will hit the lowest earners hardest. Many council leaders are concerned that if they do not implement those changes, the Scottish Government will also penalise them in future years as well. Perhaps that is why Edinburgh City Council is receiving one of the lowest shares of funding by SNP and green ministers in this budget. SNP and green ministers will genuinely pause and reflect following this budget process. Many of us have said that in previous budgets, but I really do hope that they consider that this is not a great celebration for councils that this money is coming. This is going to be difficult decisions for them and they will have to cut vital public services. We again see a situation where ministers put on the table huge cuts to finances. Then they rethink that and then they come back with a slightly lower cut and then hope that councils in this Parliament will celebrate that. That is simply unacceptable. We need to see the resetting of the relationship and a genuine partnership delivered, which brings respect between the Scottish Government and Scottish Parliament to our local authorities as well, and the powers and the funding that they need to deliver vital local services that we all rely on. We on these benches would take a different approach. It is time for the creation of a new fiscal framework for councils, which would see automatic amounts transferred each year from the Scottish Government's budget to help them deliver vital local services. As I said at the start, we will not oppose the order because we do not want to penalise or disrupt the work of our local authorities. However, we need to highlight the fact that this is a poor funding settlement being delivered by the Scottish Government today, which will impact on all of our communities. It is clear that the SNP green budget will have a negative impact on councils across Scotland. We are already seeing councils setting budgets with increased council tax, an average of 3 per cent at a time. We are facing a cost of living crisis, increases in charging for local services and cuts to services at the same time. The responsibility for that lies firmly at the door of this SNP green government today. I hope, as I have said, that councils will face an opportunity in the future to have a grown-up responsible debate with ministers around the finance that they receive and the finance that they need. Councils will face many difficult decisions in the coming weeks and years. I hope that SNP green ministers will reset that approach and prioritise local government, which is something that we all want to see across this Parliament. Labour will vote for the order today. We do so reluctantly, with no enthusiasm, to ensure that councils get the allocations offered and, more in hope than expectation, that the cost of living support package makes it into the pockets of those who need it most. We disagreed with the SNP green budget because it will continue to squeeze our local authorities dry. It is not a fair funding package for our communities. It is a timid, uninspiring budget. It forces councils to comply and make more cuts while they struggle to keep up with demand for local services. The Government's delusional spin said that the budget represents a total cash increase in real terms, but, as we should come to expect, year on year it is in fact packed full of cuts. The overall pie might have increased, but only because the proportion of the ring-fence budget—the bit locally elected councillor—can't make decisions on has increased 70-fold since 2013. This year alone will jump from 11.5 per cent of their budget to 17.9 per cent of the revenue grant. Councils came into this budget-setting process, setting out what they would need to survive—700 million pounds—and to thrive their estimated £1.5 billion extra. That must have fallen on deaf ears because it was business as usual for the SNP and the Greens and what they got was nothing. Funding for core services is flat. It is the same as it was in 2021-22 and therefore a real terms cut. In a matter of months, the difference will be magnified further as one-way inflation takes hold, pay claims come in and the service demand escalates when people struggle and the cost of living crisis worsens. That comes on top of a decade of cuts. A decade of cuts that mean, since 2013-14, the core services budget that income from the general revenue grant and business rates is worth now £911 million less in real terms. The SNP has let inflation eat away at services across the country. Glasgow's budget is worth £182 million less. North Lanarkshire is £69 million. Edinburgh is £65 million. That is millions of pounds gone, gone from the services that keep our towns, villages and communities going. It is no wonder then that social work is on its knees, roads are crumbling, libraries have closed and bins overflow weekly. That is what years of the SNP raiding council budget sketches, stripping services to the bone just as this order will do. When we look at the period of Scottish Government allocations over the same period, the revenue budget has grown by 8 per cent, but core council funding has been slashed by 12 per cent since 2013-14. Worsemore is still to come. The £120 million that the cabinet secretary found is not baseline, so 2022 will be spent looking for further savings in 2023. The one-off £30 million that council got in the autumn to settle a play game was not baseline either. There is no headroom for next year. Local Government pandemic heroes patronised all year long by Government ministers and told that they are not comparable to NHS workers, fear and even worse pay offer this year, which will fall behind the cost of living. Councils know to expect a very difficult industrial landscape ahead, just as the local government committee heard, but, as ever, the Government seems unwilling to listen. Finally, I want to raise with the minister that a pollen choice to copy the Tory cost of living council tax rebate and simply stick a saltire on it. Despite the SNP promising repeatedly to reform council tax, we are no further forward in abandoning the Tory's regressive policy. Council tax has never been at a proxy for income, but to a hugely wasteful effect, the Government's own figures show that 40 per cent of those due to that £150 have above average incomes. Around 100,000 of the richest households, those with the top 10 per cent of incomes, are set to receive that £150 because they live in properties band A to D. More importantly than that, payment should be made directly to people so that they can budget for themselves, just as we proposed with our fuel payment. It would be absolutely disastrous if that £150 went towards the £260 million of council tax debt that 300,000 households owe. It is a poor offer, just like the wider package for local government, which will not do much to support those who need the help most or support our communities. I now call on Alex Cole-Hamilton on behalf of the Scottish Liberal Democrats up to four minutes. I rise for the Liberal Democrats, and this is an important debate, as Miles Briggs said. It is not just a technical debate. I have to start by saying that the tone of the minister's remarks was quite, frankly, astonishing because it jars terribly with the message that we are all receiving from our councils, our councillors and public servants, the ones that are at the sharp end of this coalition government's choices. I was on the panel discussion, as I said, at COSLA's annual conference last Friday. Miles Briggs was, too. Alongside me were Ben Macpherson and Lorna Slater, and their defence of this local government settlement was entirely eviscerated. Public servants from across Scotland spoke out about the devastating choices they are being forced to make as a result of these cuts. I do not know whether it was because the SNP and Queen Ministers did not feed anything back from that meeting or whether they even tried to affect any kind of change, but it is deeply restable that there has not been any kind of rethink. As I said, at stage 3 of the budget, the finance secretary has set the same elephant trap as her predecessors. Year after year, the SNP laid down a punishing cut to councils only to offer a little extra cash at the 11th hour and expect to be lauded as some kind of heroes for so doing, but make no mistake, deleting £370 million from the budget only to restore £120 million of that still leads to £250 million. As Anas Sarwar said at the COSLA event, it is a bit like taking £20 from your wallet and giving you £5 back and expecting to be thanked for it. It was very clear from the COSLA conference that nobody involved at any level of running public services is fooled by the claims that there is any kind of funding boost here or additional funding. Everyone can see right through those tricks and there are no heroes today on the Government benches and that includes the Scottish Green Party, who have been busy this week trying to claim that they are having an influence in government and getting things done. Well, what I didn't see among the slim pickings in the press and social media was the Scottish Greens taking the credit for their coalition's £250 million cut to our local authorities. It is the single biggest decision that they have made since entering this Government, and it is a rotten one. It stinks. While the Greens and SNP MSPs do not want to own it, there is no escaping the harm that it will do to local services in every community and in every corner of Scotland. I want to end this contribution with an appeal because those same communities are already busy working out what they can do to help the people of Ukraine. I have written to the external affairs secretary, Angus Robertson, to ask him to ensure that local authorities are provided with a new funding to support those fleeing the invasion. Last week, SCV News revealed that as many as 300 Afghans remain in temporary bridging accommodation, 151 are still in hotels here in Edinburgh. That is nowhere near good enough. We are not ready for the influx of refugees. I am determined that both Scotland and the UK make generous offers of support to those who have to leave their country for fear for their lives. There is not a moment to lose in preparing our offers of safe harbour, in preparing our communities and our councils to receive them, including what that means across services, including housing, education and health. That must be backed up by funding to ensure that everyone who arrives is given every opportunity to start a new life, and for the long term if needs be. I hope that the minister will address that in closing and set out details of when those plans will be published and what support the Scottish Government is prepared to give local authorities getting ready to receive those refugees. I am grateful to colleagues from across the chamber for their contributions in the debate this afternoon. I welcome the comments from Mr Briggs and Mr Griffin, who stated that they will not oppose and will vote for the order. I welcome that. I welcome the important point raised by Alex Cole-Hamilton at the end. He will be aware that we have committed £4 million in aid to support Ukraine. We stand ready to do whatever we need to do to support any Ukrainians fleeing the brutal terror of Vladimir Putin's incursion and invasion into Russia. We will keep the chamber fully informed of developments as that progresses. He knows our position. We want to see the UK Government go further. We support what the UK Government has done so far, but we believe that the UK Government has to go further. I am sure that that is a position that Mr Cole-Hamilton would agree with. I recognise that a lot of the arguments that we have had this afternoon are rehearsing arguments that we have had previously. I want to pick up on three points in a constructive tone. The first was raised by Mr Briggs with regard to a fiscal framework. I recognise that the Tory proposition should be a predetermined fixed amount of the Scottish budget. I welcome the fact that an idea has been put on the table and offered, but it requires careful scrutiny. Members will be aware that the cabinet secretary is engaging with local government at pace on the development of a fiscal framework. It is a long-standing commitment that we have to pause pursuing when we were confronted with the immediate and acute crisis of the pandemic, but one that we are taking forward. Of course, that is something that has to be agreed through engagement and partnership with local government, and I am sure that that is something that the members would understand and appreciate. The second point that I want to pick up on, and I apologise to Mr Griffin if I misheard him, is that he mentioned the issue of ring funding. He will be aware, through the resource spending review, that the cabinet secretary has given a commitment to a full review of ring funding for local government, recognising that that is something that local government has raised in previous years. That will be the quiet engagement with local government, but we stand ready to have those conversations. We encourage local government to offer their ideas and the opportunity to move to a approach based on mutual trust and partnership, where we have shared outcomes and in pursuing those shared outcomes and objectives we also ensure best value. On the issue of council tax, the member will realise and respect that the Government honoured its manifestal commitments of 2011 and 2016. He will be aware of the commitment that the Government has made in partnership with the Scottish Green Party to move towards a deliberative process culminating in its citizens assembly to look at the resources of local government, including on council tax. That work, I am pleased to confirm, is under way, certainly. The minister is taking intervention on that point. With regard to the £150 cost of living payment, which the Scottish ministers have said they want to go out before the end of April, can he confirm to Parliament that the software and information that councils will need to deliver that is now in place? I am not in the position right now to speak on behalf of local government, but it does pick up a point in relation to what Mr Griffin said. The cabinet secretary, when she announced the funding, recognised that this is not perfect, but I think that we should not make the perfect and any of the good. The reality is that there is a priority to get this money out. Of course, we could have taken more time to go and design systems, but I think that the clear priority was to get money out, and that is what we are seeking to deliver, certainly. If the minister could clarify that not a single penny of that funding should go towards paying existing council tax debt, that would ensure that it reached those who need it most. I would say that, in recognition that we have sought to ensure that this money is a cash payment, we have to recognise that this is being delivered by local government and ultimately local government is administering it, but I take the point that the member is making. I think that the final point is at four minutes, Presiding Officer. I need to conclude at this particular point. There is a lot more that I could say, but I think that it has been lacking from the comments, and I have sought to take a constructive tone. What has been lacking once again, Presiding Officer, in this discussion around local government finance, is any sense of what budget line should be deprioritised to allow for additional investment in the budget. I want to have a mature debate on local government financing, but it is not enough sympathy to come to the chamber and say that there should be more money for local government, but not any indication of where that money should come from. I hope that this can be the last year that we have this conversation that we have every year. As we move into the budget process next year, if members believe that the local government finance settlement should be increased, which is a perfectly legitimate position to take, I hope that it will identify from which budget line that should be taken. That concludes the debate on local government finance, Scotland Order 2022. It is now time to move on to the next item of business.