Seòmar agus comataidhean

Good morning and happy new year, everyone.

I have been speaking to councils right across Scotland, including all four of your councils. The general sentiment about the Verity house agreement is that it is definitely needed. All the councils welcome the agreement, but not one of them believes that it has been working. One council said that it could not think of a single initiative to which the principles of the Verity house agreement had been applied. Can any of you give an example of where the Verity house agreement has been applied and, if so, explain how that might be replicated in future practices?

When we spoke to local authorities, it was highlighted that they face penalties if they attempt to make savings on teacher numbers even if there are declining school rolls. What impact do such requirements have on the physical flexibility in local authorities?

On the flipside, the challenges in East Lothian are different from those in Argyll and Bute. There are more challenges in East Lothian due to the growth that is taking place there. What does the ring fencing of funds in certain areas mean for local authorities and their flexibility? How does that allow you to innovate rather than look just at teacher numbers? My question is about both sides: decline and growth.

Thank you. Convener, do I have time to ask a quick supplementary question?

Maybe I can ask it if there is time at the end.

Thank you. Would Jonathan Carr-West or Donna Hall like to say anything?

Thank you. Does Donna Hall want to come in?

Good morning, panel. Quite a lot of my question has been answered, but I feel that I owe it to the local authorities to ask it nonetheless. I have been lucky enough to have spoken to more than half of the chief execs of the 32 local authorities, and they have clearly said that one of the primary principles of the Verity house agreement was violated less than four months after the agreement was made. The First Minister failed to consult or even inform councils of the council tax freeze. In essence, the agreement fell at the first hurdle. Those were their words and it is also what a lot of people are saying—as I am hearing from you today as well.

Do witnesses think that the role of local government and central Government will change, or was the agreement simply empty words? I want also to go back to the issue of behaviours: what behaviours should change, or should have happened from the beginning? I put my question to Professor Jim Gallagher.

Thank you. Before I move to Jonathan Carr-West, I will come back to you, Professor Gallagher. You talk about a set of procedures to be followed. One can easily put down on paper a set of procedures and one can easily sign that, as with the Verity house agreement, but how does one make sure that someone complies? Will penalties be put in? Are you aware of any such frameworks or policies having been used before? It is important to know how we make sure that this is followed. If the Scottish Government were to break the agreement again, who will be liable and who will be responsible? I know that these are heavy words, but we do not want just words. How can we help firm it up a little bit more?

Earlier, we were speaking about ring fencing. We have heard from more than half of the local authorities, which have spoken about issues around ring fencing time and again. The Verity house agreement envisages a fiscal framework with a presumption against ring fencing. Is it likely that that approach can be delivered, particularly when ring fencing continues to be emphasised in relation to areas such as teacher numbers—an area that most of the local authorities chose to highlight? Obviously, they welcome the removal of ring fencing so that they can make decisions locally. However, they are talking about teacher numbers and other areas where ring fencing might not be removed. What is your view on ring fencing in that regard?

Before I ask the same question of Professor Hall and Professor Gallagher, do you believe that completely removing ring fencing would open up more doors? I am hearing from you that innovation plays a role in how services can be delivered more efficiently and effectively, and, probably, more in line with today’s technology.