Seòmar agus comataidhean

On the impact of taking a different approach, some of my case work—which all members will have—around rebuilding confidence in the insurance industry and getting a solution shows that there are concerns about a different approach potentially being taken at the end of this process and having the situation that has been outlined around high-risk and low-risk buildings. We will have representatives of the insurance industry at the committee in the future. What concerns are there about that approach creating two very different situations north and south of the border, and have you fed those back to the Scottish Government?

Good morning, everyone. I am an MSP for the Lothian region.

I have a couple of questions, the first of which is about the scope. Why do you feel that the Scottish Government has excluded student accommodation, hotels and care homes? We know from the conversation that England seems to be way ahead in getting work on those properties taken forward. I think that 21 per cent of them are now having remedial works done, whereas the figure is just 1 per cent in Scotland. Why do you think the Scottish Government has taken that decision in the legislation?

Finally, I want to go back to Stephen Andrew’s point, from the very beginning—it was also raised by the previous panel—about communication. The bill does not necessarily capture this, because it probably sits within a factors bill on the future management of risk.

A lot of people who are currently in buildings do not feel that there is that standard communication with them. We have heard feedback loops mentioned, which, for people in social rented properties, are the responsibility of the housing association or the council. Looking specifically at how that communication should be improved under the bill, what suggestions do you have? Although it is not your area of responsibility—it may be for the factor who has been appointed, or there are often connections between developers and factors—do you have any suggestions of what that should look like in any potential amendments to suggest to Government? I think that that is at the heart of what a lot of people are frustrated about—not having proper communication over this period and not knowing what is going on, even if good work is sometimes taking place.

I mentioned Stephen Andrew, so I will bring you back in.

I am an MSP for Lothian region.

In the past, a lot of councils have taken decisions, for example, to set up arm’s-length organisations for leisure services. There are reports here in Edinburgh that significant potential cuts and closures are being considered.

Where councils have taken such decisions and are potentially looking at cutting their funding for those services—and, in turn, making the services unsustainable in the future—is the Scottish Government advising them on what different models are possible, and suggesting that they take a different approach? Is Government working with councils to develop such approaches and to ensure that those potential cuts and closures do not take place?

In the Scottish Government’s letter to the committee, ministers acknowledge that there are significant workforce shortages and challenges, and that those will

“continue to have a significant impact”,

often making it more difficult

“for local and national government to achieve ... shared priorities ... committed to in the Verity House Agreement.”

In previous meetings, we have touched on that issue with regard to the workforce challenges in planning departments. Why do you think that workforce planning has been so poor for such a long period, and what can change in that respect? The Verity house agreement did not place a real emphasis on the need for future workforce planning.

Thank you—that was helpful.

We have already touched on the issue of reserves, but what is COSLA’s view on the use of reserves by councils to cover some of the funding gaps that they face? The issue of reserves and how big or depleted they are has already been part of our conversations and deliberations, but I just wondered what COSLA’s view is and what advice is being given to councils.

That is helpful—thank you.

Given that we are going through a period of change, is it time to review the funding formula for councils? I represent Edinburgh, which receives the lowest share per head of population but has some of the largest challenges in the country around homelessness and children in temporary accommodation. There are also the national events that take place in the capital and the costs that arise from those. What is COSLA’s thinking on that? When I have put that point to the Scottish Government, it has said that it is happy to take that forward but that it wants COSLA to suggest that it wants that to take place.

There may be more questions about that. We could ask the Scottish Government for information on the councils that have had to use their reserves and on those that are considering using them.

I also want to ask about national policies that require local authorities to assist in their delivery. To what extent does COSLA ensure that policies that are to be delivered by local authorities are appropriately funded, and that they can be properly maintained in line with inflation and in consideration of potential additional demands that might emerge? What framework currently exists, and what should be coming through the Verity house agreement? What does it look like now, and what needs to change?