Chamber and committees

Good morning, minister. My question follows on from Mark Griffin’s. Councils are providing more new and improved services—including free school lunches, early childhood education and services relating to social care obligations—that have outpaced the funding that is supplied by the Scottish Government. My question is on teacher numbers. Does local government have to retain teacher numbers, even where enrolment is declining?

It is very promising to hear from you today that you are moving away from input measures and towards outcomes. I have spoken to about 24 authorities, and they have welcomed that language on outcomes, especially with teacher numbers. However, where enrolment is declining, authorities must still deliver the teacher numbers that the Scottish Government has proposed. Local authorities feel that, although teacher numbers are important, innovation and teaching in different ways are also important. Many things surround teaching; it is not just about teacher numbers. What is your view on that?

Thank you.

Jamie Robertson, East Dunbartonshire is an area of growth.

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.