Local Government’s Conflict with the Scottish Government
Question: In carrying out its functions, local government in Scotland has come into conflict
with the Scottish Government. Discuss.
In carrying out its function, local government in Scotland has to an extent come into conflict with the
Scottish Government; throughout this essay this will be examined.
Local government has not come into conflict with the Scottish Government in relation to the
concordat. In 2007, the concordat was created through the involvement of COSLA and the current
SNP government. COSLA is the face of all 32 Local Authorities and their purpose is to represent Local
Authorities through communications with the Scottish Government on their behalf. The concordat is
an agreement between the Scottish Government and Local Authorities based on partnership and
mutual respect promoting the alignment of funding and activities within the local authorities. In this
agreement COSLA agreed that Local Governments would not increase council tax in return for a
decrease in ring-fencing so, in 2008, Councils were given £10 billion from the Scottish Government
and only £3 billion was ring-fenced, a massive achievement for Local Authorities. This in the past had
caused much conflict between them as councils felt they had no power. Counsellor, David O’Neill
even accused the previous Scottish Government of being "far too much micro-managing" in terms
of the council’s budget whereas this new policy meant Local Authorities were given greater flexibility
and control over their budget, precisely what Local Authorities had loathed for in the previous year’s
making both the Scottish Government – for losing responsibility and therefore arguably the
accountability of budget decisions within Councils- and Local Government content with their
relationship.
This therefore proves that in carrying out their function Local Government has not come into
conflict with the Scottish Government in relation to the concordat which stated that both should
work together in partnership to improve success in Scotland along with the end to ring fencing
which enabled councils to have more freedom and control over their budgets.
On the other hand, conflict was created between the Scottish Government and Local Government
due to disapproval towards the end to ring fencing and almost ignorance towards the concordat.
Although Local Authorities and the Scottish Government to an extent were pleased about this policy
–end to ring fencing-, many others were not. This included Labour who expressed great concern that
this agreement created a “postcode lottery” for citizens living in Scotland. This meant that
depending on where a person lives their services may differ in quality and quantity in result of how
their councils decide to spend their money, and this potentially could leave vulnerable families to
suffer, a very valid argument which brought up conflict in parliament. Along with this Patricia
Gibson, member of Glasgow City Council’s Children and Families Policy Development Committee
also expressed her worries stating that “I think it’s about councils – not those that are slow because
councils have difficulties – but councils like Glasgow where they are deliberately not serving the
needs of their people in order to thwart a national government that they’re opposed to.” So from
her view and probably many others, some councils, in this instance Glasgow, are not providing the
services they should to make the current SNP Government, who they may oppose due to their
majority Labour support, look bad and hopefully improve support for other parties which again is a
valid argument and will not only cause concern from Scottish people but conflict between both the
Scottish Government and Local Authorities for obvious reasons. Conflict also surfaced in 2011 when
SNP, Justice Secretary, Kenny MacAskill announced a consultation process on the decision of
whether to maintain the current eight fire services and polices forces in Scotland, reduce them on a
regional basis or convert to a single service for each. However the SNP Government appeared
adamant that these services would become a single service before they had even consulted with
COSLA. This infuriated Local Authorities with Councillor Pat Watters, president of COSLA, accusing
the Scottish Government of ignoring the fact that this matter is a function of the Local Government,
which is correct according to the agreement of the concordat, and should not be dictated by
Hollyrood who had clearly ignored and undermined this.
This proves that Local Authorities have come into conflict with the Scottish Government, while
carrying out its function, as a result of the end to ring fencing being criticised by opposing political
parties for being unpredictable and the Government undermining the agreement stated in the
concordat leading to frustration and anger from Local Authorities.
Conversely, Local Authorities and the Scottish Government did not come into conflict when it came
to the implementation of policy. The Scottish Government relies heavily on councils to help
implement their initiatives as they are in contact more with the local communities in Scotland
making it easier for them to encourage changes. This was demonstrated in 2005 when the Smoking,
Health and Social Care (Scotland) Bill was introduced which restricted anyone from smoking in a
public place. The council partnered with the Scottish Government to ensure this was possible. Fines
were given to anyone caught breaching this and it was made clear by Councils that it was not
acceptable. In turn, the Smoking Ban was very successful in Scotland. Along with this, a previous bill,
the Alcohol etc (Scotland) Act 2010 had also been successfully accomplished with Local Authorities
again supporting the SNP Government’s policy. In 2007, the Scottish Government announced their
plans of a new education system which would allow students to leave school with better social skills
and experience for the working world, this is known as the Curriculum for Excellence. All 32 Local
Councils, except East Renfrewshire who will be introducing this in a year, introduced the new system
in schools across their communities and it has now successfully been implemented across Scotland.
Without the help and support of Local Councils it would arguably not have been possible to
successfully implement these policies.
Therefore this shows that Local Authorities and the Scottish Government avoided conflict due to
the implementation of policy, which enabled both to work together in order to implement the
Scottish Government’s initiatives successfully as the councils work closely with communities and
can easily pressure local citizens to follow new policies and rules as proven by the smoking ban.
Oppositely, Local Authorities and the Scottish Government have come into conflict as a result of
council tax. Within the concordat COSLA agreed with the Scottish Government that they would
accept a freeze on council tax therefore Local Authorities could not raise these fees and would have
to find the money in other places. This means Local Authorities will struggle to keep up with the
endless demands of their communities with Trade Union, Unison stating that the “council tax freeze
harms Scots services”. This is evident as the Scottish Government is already planning cuts and
expects to have to save £71 million pounds in the next two years due to the lack of funding. These
cuts have already been put into action with recent loss of jobs within councils and “hundreds more”
are expected with East Dunbartonshire alone planning to cut their payroll by 250 over the next 18
months. The Scottish Government created this agreement and offered it to COSLA, who accepted, so
Councils could be blamed for any criticisms or mistakes made like the cuts to services while their
reputation remained intact, a sly but intelligent move to make as it puts all of the pressure on Local
Authorities instead of Holyrood.
This highlights the fact that Local Authorities have come into conflict with the Scottish
Government, while carrying out its function, due to the freeze on council tax forcing Councils to
make cuts to their services therefore enraging the people living within communities resulting in
Local Authorities being put under scrutiny from the Scottish people while the Scottish Government
gets off scot free.
In conclusion, Local Government has come into conflict with the Scottish Government while carrying
out its function as a result of the disapproval to ring fencing and the council tax freeze which left
Local Authorities struggling to even maintain their services. However, they did not come into conflict
due to the concordat which states that both should work together in partnership and support each
other leading to both working together to implement new policies and the councils being awarded
more control over their budget as a result of the end to ring fencing.