Whatever happened to Scottish local government?

In 1993, Allan Cochrane asked the question Whatever happened to Local Government? Over 30 years on, this article explores this question in the aftermath of COSLA Conference 2024 and the landmark of 25 years of devolution.

Local government

Underpinning the budget campaigning for 2023 and structuring COSLA conference 2024 was the question of “what is local government for?” This invoked a range of discussions on the unique role of councils.

Comments from a panel with LGIU Chief Executive Jonathan Carr-West and NILGA President Cllr Alison Bennington reinforced this, by noting the unique blend of local democratic accountability, local knowledge, and flexible delivery, which enables local government to be a true facilitator of place.

Throughout the conference, a focus on joining up innovation and best practice was visible across the sector. Whether it be the ongoing consultation of Edinburgh’s visitor levy, a positive step forward for local revenue raising in what is a centralised system of finance, or the COSLA Excellence Awards 2024, the strengths of local government were clearly on show.

Another notable theme was the degree of local government unity. For Cochrane’s analysis of the diminishing status of English local government, a key reflection was how “the fragmentation of local government has led to a proliferation of different agencies which need to be considered as part of the local state”.

This is where Scotland sits apart. Yes, the vote over withdrawing from the National Care Service process in late September was not 32-0. But more broadly, the sector is poised to scrutinise the First Minister’s promise of “effective collaboration and partnership with local government in Scotland” with questions over delivery, as evidenced by questions to the First Minister for a repeat of the council tax freeze of 2023.

And while optimism for Verity House agreement reaches all-time lows in the wake of COSLA leaders withdrawing from the Scottish Government process over a National Care Service, the ability of Scottish local government to speak as one voice with COSLA is a marked comparison with the multiple voices which Scottish Government speaks to councils with.

Recognising that the strengths of local also relate to a separate and worthwhile discussion on “what actually is local”, COSLA and the sector are right to recognise that reasserting this core purpose of local government is both a key bulwark against the centralising tendencies of Scottish Government, and key to the delivery of transformation and meeting the future challenges facing Scotland’s public services. Local services are embedded in the communities they serve, and local governments, accountable through democratic elections, are in the best position to provide services that meet the needs of local people.

Local government

Local government sits fragile in Scotland’s wider governance ecosystem. While the Verity House Framework promises a new deal by recognising “the idea that councils know best how to serve the people in their communities”, a year of turbulence for the Verity House framework begs several questions about where local government sits in Scotland’s governance.

Shattered by last year’s Council tax freeze and further broken by Scottish Government’s solo runs over a National Care Service and teacher numbers, it is beyond doubt that the Verity House Framework offers another chapter in an ever-increasing book on the failure of post-devolution central-local relations.

This does not mean Verity House should not be forgotten. There are undoubtedly objectives worth mobilising for in the short-term, like a fiscal framework and stronger budgetary engagement, but local government needs to realise that long-term, Verity House is a spectre, a previous incarnation of central-local relations which will continue to haunt local government.

Long-term transformation of local government cannot progress without recognising that we are in a post-Verity House era, and while occasional areas of collaboration are welcome, this cannot replace a framework of central-local relations.

What can be learned from Verity House is the weakness of central-local frameworks which are based on “statements of intent” versus legal obligations, and the need to recognise the co-dependency between high-level frameworks and policy networks.

A point illustrated by James Mitchell’s appraisal of Verity House Framework in May 2024, it is below the formal framework level where this year’s COSLA conference harnessed collaborations through policy networks, where shared priorities, personal relationships, respect and communication, are drivers of true collaboration. Sessions on population health framework demonstrate the fruits of co-produced policy and it is important to recognise this more opaque layer of collaboration. Local government’s position in Scotland’s governance ecosystem is essential, and as an essential part of how Scottish government works it needs to be protected.

Looking forward?

Sir Neil McIntosh succinctly put it in 1999 that the “onus of proof must always be on those who propose centralisation, to demonstrate that it will indeed bring greater benefit to the public at large”.

Fast-forward to 2024, the arguments around centralisation are not about tackling false economies of scale but merely trying to focus policy debate on impact, and not narrow fixations on inputs.

Another almost immediate impact of devolution was the emergence of ring-fencing as a physical manifestation of the asymmetry which mars central-local relations. Fast-forward to today, our 2023 State of Local Government Finance survey reaffirmed the pressure this adds to the unsustainable nature of local government finance in Scotland.

The point of this article is not to focus on what could have happened, but to underline what is happening with the trajectories facing local government in Scotland. Twenty-five years from devolution, a continuous trajectory of creeping centralisation combined with deteriorating public services and two attempts at central-leaving relations leaves local government in a vicious cycle of diminishment.

Despite the wealth of innovation and creativity displayed by local councillors and officers, whether in serving communities 365 days a year, rising to meet needs during the pandemic, or spearheading sector-led transformation projects, an overriding question for those passionate about local democracy is whether Scottish local government can survive a repeat of the last 25 years?

To conclude, “Local by default, national by agreement” is a neat catch-all maxim, but 25 years of devolution show that it is the underlying logic that proves elusive, a logic that local government, accountable through democratic elections, is best placed to provide services that meet the needs of local people. How we embed that logic while meeting rising demand, reduced resources, and reframing Scottish Government’s obsessions with inputs over impacts is a question deserving of its own conference.

Thank you to LGIU member leaders, offficers, and Professor Mitchell for the informal comments, remarks and perspectives which provide the background context of this article. In the coming weeks, we will again formalise our members voices through the LGIU Scotland State of Local Government Finance 2024 to give an evidence base on the direction of travel in council finances.