Service please

Political Correspondent

YEAR after year the budget available to councillors in Glasgow has been cut.

With no sign of budget allocations being increased in the near future it has raised the question of whether councils can effectively deliver the full range of services into the future.

Glasgow’s council leader Frank McAveety raised the very issue with MSPs at a committee in the Scottish Parliament late last year.

In some areas the demand is growing at an alarming rate.

In care of the elderly the situation facing the city was described by one senior council official as a “tidal wave of demand”.

And it has a knock on effect on other services

Despite reducing it by 70%, the challenge of putting in place enough care packages for the growing number of people who require assistance is the main reason for delayed discharge in our hospitals.

In education pressure to improve the city’s poor attainment rate particularly in the poorer areas requires investment.

An increasing reliance on tourism and conferences and conventions means the city has to look its best to attract visitors meaning more cash needing spent on maintaining the environment.

Millions of pounds extra has been spent on the roads repair budget in recent years but still more is needed to cope with winter weather causing potholes on our roads.

All of which and more must be delivered with the latest cut of £53m this year.

Schools and nurseries, bin collections and recycling, roads, lighting and parking, licensing of pubs, taxis and houses in multiple occupation, planning, developments, parks, social work, social care, care of the elderly, environmental health and registering births deaths and marriages.

The list of council services is long and expensive to run.

The approach in previous years has been to ‘salami slice” and cut smaller amounts from departments across the council.

However the prospect of not being able to deliver some services has already been raised.

At the committee Mr McAveety warned that cuts had a direct impact on services.

He said anyone who said it was modest amounts with modest impact was “kidding themselves”.

He also warned: “There will be councils who in three years, there are services they can’t provide that they are expected to by the public.”

The ability to raise income to fill the gap left is also not considered adequate.

The three percent council tax increase will bring in about £7m in Glasgow.

A council spokesman said that Glasgow is able to raise about 12% of its income from fees and charges.

Charges for hiring halls, leisure centres and parking for example amount to little compared to the £1bn plus that comes from the Scottish Government each year

Whoever is in charge of Glasgow City Council after next week will be faced with this challenge of increasing demand and reducing income and charged with finding solutions.

They will be forced to take tough decisions on which services to prioritise and even the unenviable task of considering which services it cannot afford to run.

One solution has been reform of local government. The current 32 council structure has been in place since 1996.

Think tank, Reform Scotland has suggested fewer councils but with greater powers, not removing services.

Cosla, the umbrella body for most of Scotland’s councils, said public service reform is needed, not local government reform and any attempts to take services away should be resisted.

Some fear that education, on e the key functions of councils is at risk from being taken out of council control or its responsibilities significantly eroded.

The Conservatives have argued for greater parental control and have said that where there is demand schools shouldn’t be prevented from being taken out of council control.

The SNP manifesto in 2016 said it would give greater power to parents and teachers while setting the curriculum standards nationally.

David O’Neill, Cosla President’ said in a speech on the threat to services that the solution to financial constraint was not removing services from local control.

He said: “There seems to be in Scotland a national view from both government and Parliament of a fall-back position that when money is tight or when we wish to direct services to be effective and efficient, centralisation is the only answer. And we cannot allow that to happen in education.”