Chamber and committees

I have a follow-on question. One way to look at potential costs is to consider the position in reverse. I was a councillor when Strathclyde region was abolished in 1995, when we went from having one social work department in the region to having 12. Each local authority suddenly had 12 directors of social work and 12 deputy directors and all the rest of it. If you looked at the cost of setting up shared services, it would be interesting to see what the potential savings would be.

Thank you. That has exhausted the committee’s questions, so I will wind up the session. I remind colleagues that we will be back in our usual Tuesday morning slot next week, when we will continue to take further evidence on Scotland’s public finances in 2023-24. I thank our witnesses for their participation this afternoon.

The transient visitor levy—the tourist tax, as it is called—might be good news for Argyll and Bute, but I cannae see North Lanarkshire making much out of it. There is a real issue in the fact that it will be very uneven when it comes to which local authorities benefit from that and which do not. That will also have to be taken into consideration in deliberations on funding.

In your written submission, you said that we need “frank discussions” about what needs to be “deprioritised” in the public sector. What needs to be deprioritised?

Yes—it is from the third line down in paragraph 40.

Thank you for that. The issue that the Finance and Public Administration Committee faces is that everyone we take evidence from suggests that they should have more money for their particular area. We are always asking how that can be funded, because it is either through additional taxation or from other sections of the budget. It is helpful when people suggest that money spent on A is more effective for the public pound than money spent on B.

You talked about a whole-systems approach and your submission mentions

“a more collaborative approach to budget setting”.

How do you see that working in practice? Are you suggesting that the Scottish Government should work with COSLA or local government when it creates the budgets, or should that collaboration come at a later stage in the process?

Thanks—that is very helpful.

Mr Manning, in case you feel neglected, I am going to ask you about a number of things. One is that COSLA’s submission says that the national care service

“poses a risk to councils’ ability to deliver a wide range of services for communities”.

Does South Lanarkshire Council agree with that? If so, which services and in what way?

You are asking the question. Can you give us the answer? You are giving us an almost rhetorical question, but I am keen for you to say how retaining the current structure would be beneficial.

That is very helpful. I turn back to Katie Hagmann. In your submission, you state:

“From a human rights budgeting perspective, there is a duty to increase resources to achieve the further realisation of rights.”

What are those specific rights and how much resource would be required to realise them?

You are just teasing us, really, aren’t you? You throw these fabulous quotes into your submissions and I think, “That’s great. I’m going to ask about that, and see what it’ll mean for the 2023-24 budget.” I am not trying to ask this in a facetious way, but then you tell me—as with the previous question—that work is on-going. It is a bit frustrating, from a finance perspective, when we are looking to make recommendations for the 2023-24 budget. Is there any possibility that we will get more meat on the bones in the weeks ahead?