Seòmar agus comataidhean

Finally, you have used the term “significant increase”? Could you give us an indication of what “significant” means in that context? “Significant” could mean different things to different people, so it would be helpful to get clarity on that.

I have been listening with interest to the answers that have been given thus far, but I do not believe that it is fair to ask council tax payers to plug gaps in local authority budgets, especially at a time when the level of public services is decreasing. Council tax payers are experiencing a lot of cuts in their communities, which is causing a lot of unrest. I will come on to a question about that in a second.

We have also heard a lot about the discussions between COSLA and the Scottish Government. I am pleased to hear that those discussions are progressing. However, councils will have to grapple with two issues over the next few months as they prepare their budgets—how they can meet workers’ pay demands and how they can address the dissatisfaction that exists with council services. At a previous committee meeting, Unison said that the growing dissatisfaction was “dangerous”.

I would be interested to hear the witnesses’ views on the situation in the round, given that there is a reduced level of trust in local government and that the number of complaints about council services has increased by more than 21 per cent in the past year.

Thank you, convener. We have discussed lobbying the Scottish and UK Governments. Given that council tax revenue makes up roughly 15 to 20 per cent of councils’ overall budgets, do our witnesses believe that this year’s budget could result in another reduction in services? Is it possible that, rather than growing provision in areas of need, there might be a reduction in statutory services? I am thinking about areas such as education, social care and environmental services, which are areas in which people see the impact of direct cuts on their communities.

My question is not for this panel—apologies.

Thank you, convener. Good morning, cabinet secretary and officials. I am interested to hear the cabinet secretary’s view on local authorities being able to increase council tax next year as they see fit.

Last year, in the 2025-26 financial year, we saw Falkirk Council increase its council tax by 15.6 per cent. I am increasingly concerned that if councils follow in that same mind this year, it will have consequences for council tax payers—individuals and families who might be struggling to meet those increased costs.

When it comes to council tax reform, I am interested to hear whether the cabinet secretary believes that, as a point of principle, households on council tax bands E and upwards should pay more in council tax.

I thank the cabinet secretary for her answer, but I hope that she also understands the huge pressure on core budgets. There are areas in which there has been no ring fencing and there are services that have not been protected effectively by the ring fencing of Scottish Government funding. Those are the areas in which there are decreases and cuts to services.

I turn to the issues that councils will be grappling with. We have heard in our evidence sessions that local government is required to meet the pay demands of workers. Heading into budgets, discussions will be on-going on that and also on the growing dissatisfaction with council services. You will have heard Unison’s evidence, which claimed that that was “dangerous”. There is a reduced level of trust in local government, and the number of complaints about council services has increased by 21 per cent over the past year.

I am interested in hearing the cabinet secretary’s view on how she will assist local government with those situations, to find solutions to the issues and to ensure that we do not go into local government budget setting with communities put against councils that are just trying to tackle the financial pressures that they experience in their own local authority areas?

That is helpful.

The BS 8414 testing system has been seen as a route to compliance when it comes to cladding. What is the Government’s position on that particular testing model, given that the stark evidence from the Grenfell tower inquiry was that it should not be used as a testing system?

On that point, Homes for Scotland, the Scottish Property Federation and Scottish Land & Estates say that they do not agree with the building safety levy, so how will you, as cabinet secretary, discuss that and engage with people who are concerned about it, to ensure that those concerns are voiced? In the grand scale of what you are trying to achieve to make buildings safe, £30 million per annum seems quite small.

Cabinet secretary, I am going to probe you further on the timings for the bill. The consultation began on 28 November 2023, but I believe that the Scottish Government started talking about the issue in 2021. That is a substantial amount of time. This morning, we are hearing that there is the warmer homes plan and that nothing will be brought forward until the climate action plan has been completed, but you have had all that time to bring something forward. We have five and a bit months of this parliamentary session left. Is there sufficient time for a committee to scrutinise the bill, for amendments to be considered and for the bill to be brought to the chamber for stage 3 proceedings before the Parliament is dissolved for the election?