The public is being asked for views on alkaline hydrolysis (water cremations), burials, funeral director licensing and funeral sector inspections in four separate public consultations.
The regulations proposed in the consultations aim to protect the dignity of the deceased and increase confidence in the funeral sector by ensuring minimum standards of good care and services are maintained.
Responses to the consultation on the Burial and Cremation (Scotland) Bill showed there was public support for the introduction of new, environmentally friendly alternatives to traditional burial or cremation in Scotland.
Alkaline hydrolysis is already in use in other countries, such as Ireland, Canada and USA. This consultation sets out the safeguards which would be put in place to ensure alkaline hydrolysis would be subject to the same high standards as burial and cremation.
Public Health Minister Jenni Minto said: “Bereavement can be emotionally overwhelming and being able to engage with the practical issues and funeral arrangements can be very difficult.
“However, it is something everyone is likely to experience at some stage in their life, whether it’s the death of a family member, a loved one, or a friend.
“Having confidence in the care and dignity given to our loved ones, along with the compassionate and professional treatment of those bereaved, can go some way to alleviating that distress. The rare instances where this does not happen satisfactorily can have long-standing impacts on people.
“This is why we need to ensure we get the right policy and legal frameworks in place and I urge anyone with views on the issues in these consultations to take the time to respond.”
National Association of Funeral Directors Scotland President Mark Shaw said: “The National Association of Funeral Directors is delighted to welcome and support the public consultations into key areas that will help shape the funeral sector in a new, regulated landscape.
“These new regulations designed to support the oversight of standards in the funeral sector will provide reassurance and security to bereaved people and funeral directors, while the proposed introduction of alkaline hydrolysis, or water cremation, is a step froward in offering future alternatives to burial and cremation.
“These are incredibly important next steps to support bereaved people, and we urge everyone to have their say.”
National Society of Allied Independent Funeral Directors (SAIF) Scotland President James Morris said: “SAIF Scotland are encouraged to see the process of regulation reach the public consultation stage.
“Regulation of the Scottish funeral sector will maintain and ensure the high standards of funeral service, care of the deceased and delivery to the tens of thousands of families in need of a funeral director each year.
“SAIF Scotland looks forward to continuing to work with the Scottish Government on what has been an open and consultative process and has thoughtfully addressed concerns shared by both the Government and the funeral sector.“
The use of snare traps could be banned as part of new plans to protect vulnerable wildlife and promote sustainable wildlife management.
The Scottish Government is seeking the public’s views on whether an outright ban should be put in place or if any exemptions should be considered. A snare is a thin wire noose used for catching a wild animal for the purposes of wildlife management.
The consultation is also asking for opinions on extending the investigative powers of the Scottish SPCA – a new measure which will help tackle wildlife crime. This will involve giving SSPCA inspectors more authority to search, examine and seize evidence related to incidents of illegal hunting and other offences related to wildlife persecution.
Environment Minister Gillian Martin said:“Snare traps lead to unnecessary suffering for animals and these proposals are part of our ongoing efforts to ensure that wildlife management is both sustainable and humane.
“Currently, only a small number of farmers and land managers use snare traps. More effective and humane forms of managing wildlife are available and we will continue to support the industry to make use of these methods.
“Wildlife crime and the illegal killing of wild mammals continues to blight our rural communities. By extending the investigative powers of SSPCA inspectors, we can ensure that the destructive impact that these criminals have on our environment is diminished and that they are brought to justice.”
Scottish SPCA Chief Superintendent Mike Flynn said:“The Scottish SPCA strongly supports this announcement by the Scottish Government. As Scotland’s animal welfare charity, we have long called for an outright ban on the use of snares due to the level of suffering an animal is caused.
“Animals that are caught in snares can be caused unimaginable physical and mental anguish. Following reports from members of the public, we have found domestic animals, protected species and target animals that have all suffered dreadfully in both illegal and legal snares.
“A ban on all snaring is the only way to stop this unacceptable suffering. We are very pleased with the announcement of a ban, which will be a historic moment for animal welfare in Scotland.”
Subject to consultation, the new provisions would be included in the Scottish Government’s upcoming Wildlife Management and Muirburn (Scotland) Bill which will aim to protect the environment and help end the persecution of birds of prey.
The consultation will run for 6 weeks from 22 August to 3 October 2023.
The League Against Cruel Sports Scotland has welcomed yesterday’s (Tuesday) announcement by the Scottish Government that it will consult with a view to banning snares.
The consultation, which will form part of the Wildlife Management and Muirburn (Scotland) Bill, will seek views on whether an outright ban should be put in place for the use of snares, or if any exemptions should be considered.
A snare is a thin wire noose used for catching a wild animal, most commonly used for predator control on shooting estates.
Robbie Marsland, Director of the League Against Cruel Sports, Scotland, said: “The League has been proud to join the loud and anguished call over many years for the use of cruel, primitive and indiscriminate snares to be banned.
“While we welcome and applaud the Scottish Government’s intent to consider a ban, we are under no illusions the strength of feeling among those who wish to use snares in the countryside.
“The Government will face fierce opposition to these proposals but the arguments to outlaw their use once and for all, far outweigh any arguments to continue using this as a method of trapping and killing hundreds of thousands of wild animals, and non-target species, every year.”
The consultation is also asking for opinions on extending the investigative powers of the Scottish SPCA – a new measure which will help tackle wildlife crime.
Robbie Marslandadded: “Our field workers have had to document and photograph an appalling array of mutilated foxes, exhausted badgers and even snared cats and dogs in order to demonstrate why these devices should be consigned to history.
“But with snares gone, the killing will continue. While we welcome the removal of one cruel and inhuman method of killing, we still deeply question why hundreds of thousands of animals will continue to be killed each year to make sure there are more grouse to shoot for sport.”
The consultation will run for six weeks from late August until the beginning of October 2023. Following this, the new provisions would be included in the Wildlife Management and Muirburn (Scotland) Bill which is currently at Stage 1 in the Scottish Parliament.
UK Government seeks views on adding pack inserts to tobacco products to encourage smokers to quit
Pack inserts are used internationally including in Canada and Israel, and proven to encourage people to give up smoking
Initial report on the Major Conditions Strategy to be published today
The UK government will seek views on adding pack inserts into tobacco products to encourage more smokers to quit as it launches a new consultation today.
Placed inside the packaging of cigarettes and hand rolling tobacco, they would contain positive messages to encourage people to quit and signpost them to advice and support.
The messages set out the health benefits of quitting – for example, improvements to breathing within a matter of days and a 50% reduction in the risk of heart attack within a year – as well as showing smokers how much money they stand to save by giving up, with the average person likely to save over £2,000 per year if they quit.
Smoking remains the single leading preventable cause of illness and mortality in the UK. It results in nearly 4% of all hospital admissions each year – equivalent to almost 450,000 admissions. Tobacco-related harms are also estimated to cost taxpayers an estimated £21 billion every year, including over £2 billion in costs to the NHS.
Although smoking rates in the UK are at an all-time low, by taking further action, the government will seek to cut waiting lists and reduce the burden on the NHS. Introducing pack inserts into all tobacco products in the UK could lead to an additional 30,000 smokers giving up their habit – delivering health benefits worth £1.6 billion.
Health and Social Care Secretary Steve Barclay said: “Smoking places a huge burden on the NHS, economy and individuals. It directly causes a whole host of health problems – including cancers and cardiovascular disease – and costs the economy billions every year in lost productivity.
By taking action to reduce smoking rates and pursuing our ambition to be smokefree by 2030, we will reduce the pressure on the NHS and help people to live healthier lives.”
The consultation – which opens today – will seek views on the introduction and design of pack inserts.
Pack inserts are already used in other countries – including Canada and Israel, with Australia also announcing its intention to introduce them – and there is evidence that they can be an effective means of encouraging smokers to quit.
An evaluation of the policy’s impact in Canada found that almost 1 in 3 smokers had read the inserts at least once in the past month, and that those who were exposed to the inserts multiple times were significantly more likely to try to give up smoking.
The consultation builds on a recent package of measures designed to drive the government’s ambition to be smokefree by 2030 – which means reducing smoking rates to 5% or less.
These measures include:
Funding a new national ‘swap to stop’ scheme – the first of its kind in the world – to offer a million smokers across England a free vaping starter kit, alongside expert support
Launching a financial incentive scheme – in the form of vouchers alongside behavioural support – to support pregnant women to stop smoking, with an aim to reach all pregnant smokers by the end of next year
A new strategy to combat illicit tobacco, which will outline efforts to catch and punish those involved in the illegal market
Deborah Arnott, chief executive of Action on Smoking and Health (ASH), said: “Smoking is very addictive, and it takes smokers on average thirty attempts before they succeed in stopping, so encouraging them to keep on trying is vital.
“Pack inserts do this by backing up the grim messages about death and disease on the outside with the best advice about how to quit on the inside.
“They will help deliver not just the Smokefree 2030 ambition, but also the Major Conditions Strategy, as smoking is responsible for all six major conditions from cancer to cardiovascular and respiratory disease, as well as dementia, mental ill health and musculoskeletal disorders.”
The consultation launch comes as the government publishes an initial report on its Major Conditions Strategy – which covers the six groups of conditions accounting for 60% of all ill-health and early death in England.
One in four people in England live with two or more major long-term conditions, and the initial report sets out the direction for the strategy to tackle these groups of conditions – cancers, cardiovascular diseases (including stroke and diabetes), musculoskeletal disorders, mental ill health, dementia and chronic respiratory conditions.
This includes by addressing key risk factors and lifestyle drivers of ill-health and disease, including smoking, which is a direct contributor to all six groups of conditions covered by the strategy. For example, it is the biggest cause of cancer, with one in every five cancer deaths in England connected to smoking.
A world leader in reducing smoking rates, UK levels are currently at their lowest on record at 13.3%. But across the UK, 1 in 7 adults still smoke – around 6.6 million people – and the impacts on the NHS and economy are significant.
Tobacco also costs the economy in England an estimated £14 billion in lost productivity every year, due to lost earnings, unemployment and early deaths. The average smoker stands to save approximately £2,000 per year from giving up their habit.
Your Voice Matters in Shaping Health and Social Care!
Ever wanted to put your question to the Cabinet Secretary for NHS Recovery, Health, and Social Care? Here’s your chance!
Michael Matheson MSP will appear before the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee on 12th September, and the Committee want to hear from you.
Whether you’re part of the public or work in health and care, submit your relevant questions on topics such as the NHS recovery from the pandemic and be part of scrutinising the work of government.
Clare Haughey MSP, Convener of the Committee, says, “This is a great opportunity… your suggested questions may help to inform our scrutiny of the Scottish Government’s approach.”
MEETING DATES: TWO drop-in consultation sessions on Monday 7 August and Tuesday 15 August and the Teams meeting set for Thursday 17 August.**
Community Councillors are invited to ‘make initial contributions and suggestions regarding the existing Community Council scheme and boundaries and to ‘provide feedback and recommendations for any proposed changes that you believe would be beneficial’.
This invitation was discussed at the Members’ Board last Thursday. Here are some issues we think are worth your attention:
A] Community Council Boundaries
1. New community council wards:
How many and where?
On the basis of what growth projections for city expansion?
What data sources are to be used?
2. Size of community council wards:
On what basis will the size of community council areas be reviewed and targeted?
What data sources are to be used?
What intentions are there to reduce a wide dispersion (imbalance) in community council area ‘size’ (number of residents) across the city?
What could be done to ‘rebalance’?
3. Boundaries:
Boundary changes should be fully explained and justified to residents.
What will be done to reshape boundaries, in order to reduce the incidence of community council ‘crossover’ into two (or even three) City Councillor electoral wards, so that the ‘mapping’ of a community council to one and only one (four-strong) group of City Councillors is tightened up? (A community council area perimeter should be bounded within a single electoral ward.)
What measures will then be introduced to improve liaison and coordination across electoral wards and in turn across Localities?
B] Scheme for Community Councils
1. Minimum number of ‘elected community council members’ (2019 Scheme, Para 6.24):
There is evident current strain on a number of community councils, stemming from a fall-away in the participation of active elected members towards or below the critical level of ‘half of the maximum permitted elected membership’.
In light of that, what new flexible support measures can CEC Governance introduce to the Scheme rules in order to avoid (in such circumstances) the undue lapse of community councils into an ‘inactive state’ (whereby residents are then ‘disenfranchised’)?
2. Resourcing of a community council (2019 Scheme, Paras 11.9 and 11.11):
Contemporary ‘support needs’ for a well-functioning community council nowadays centre on IT, on website maintenance and repair, on technical assistance with AV equipment for hybrid meetings, all alongside the minuting and reporting of community council proceedings.
The absence of such support blunts a community council’s effectiveness in its core role and its ambition, especially when ‘something goes wrong’.
The need for CEC operational support now goes well beyond ‘additional support services/resourcing, such as photocopying and distribution of community council minutes and agendas and (also) free lets of halls for community council meetings’, as offered in the 2019 Scheme Review.
There is a case for a (much) stronger CEC commitment to dependable, core operational back-up of community councils’ governance and administration work.
What new avenues of operational (and financial) assistance can CEC look to introduce in this current Scheme Review?
**Here are the dates, and the opportunity to put some meaningful questions to CEC.
Monday 7 August 2023 17.00-19.30 Waverley Court, 4 East Market Street, EH8 8BG, Ground Floor, Room 15
Tuesday 15 August 2023 13.00-16.00 Waverley Court, 4 East Market Street, EH8 8BG, Ground Floor, Room 15
Thursday 17 August 2023 17.00-19.30 Virtual meeting held via Microsoft Teams – if you would like to attend please make contact with CEC (by email to community.councils@edinburgh.gov.uk) no later than 14.00 on 17 August 2023 to confirm your attendance and request the link to join the session.
ANGER AND CONFUSION OVER MANSE ROAD SAFETY MEASURES
Council officers have responded to an incident at the weekend involving vandalism and graffiti to a controversial trial bus gate on Manse Road, which left a pylon in a precarious and dangerous position.
Councillor Scott Arthur, Transport and Environment Convener, said: “There’s no excuse for dangerous criminal behaviour like this. We are lucky a member of the public reported it to us early on Sunday morning so that our crews could quickly attend and make the column safe, and I’d like to thank them for this.
“The trial road safety measures in Corstorphine aim to address the fact the majority of local residents (67%) feel there is an issue with vehicles in area. Ultimately, however, improving safety in the street does have some impact on vehicle use – primarily for traffic cutting through the area on the way to somewhere else.
“Given that context, this type of reckless criminal behaviour is shameful, and I know that local people both for and against the scheme are concerned about what’s happened. The damage to council property and the graffiti is completely unacceptable and all it achieves is disruption, expense and a damaging effect on the reputation of a great local community.
“We’ll be reviewing CCTV footage and speaking to Police this week, and I’d urge anyone who knows who may be responsible for this senseless criminal act to reach out to Police too.
“Given the risk the damage posed to the people in the adjacent retirement housing, I hope those responsible are promptly brought to justice.”
The design for Corstorphine Connections was approved by the Transport and Environment Committee in August 2021.
As part of the development of the designs for the project the Council carried out a significant amount of engagement with the local community, many of whom highlighted concerns about the volume and speed of traffic in the area.
Independent market research carried out showed that 67% of people living in the area thought vehicle traffic was a problem, and those with disabilities were more likely to be concerned about the situation.
By limiting through traffic and providing spaces to sit, relax and interact, Corstorphine Connections aims to create a much safer and more welcoming environment for people living there.
Cllr Arthur added:“I know already that many parents have enjoyed being able to walk and cycle more easily with their children in the area since the Council started implementing the scheme, particularly during the recent warmer weather.
“The Council retained access for all residents travelling by car too, alongside these changes, so that those who choose to drive can still do so. It is now much harder, however, for delivery drivers etc to cut through the residential area on the way to somewhere else.
“There are plenty safe and sensible ways to share your views on this trial which we are keen to listen to. I have now attended the local Community Council twice to listen to residents, and I’ve made sure a Council Officer attended every time it met over the past year to answer questions and collect feedback.
“I have also said I will return whenever they want. Additionally, I have done the school run with a local parent, met with a second resident and have a further meeting with a local resident in the pipeline.”
Plans to boost UK employment through widening access to high-quality health support in the workplace are being unveiled today by the Westminster Government
Ministers are urging employers to do more to keep workers healthy and reduce the numbers out of work due to long-term sickness
Consultation launching on measures to increase employer uptake and widen reach of Occupational Health
Plans include a new standard for businesses to adopt to boost health in the workplace
Better workplace support expected to grow the economy and tackle inactivity by improving productivity and preventing health-related job losses
The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) and Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) are today publishing a consultation on ways to increase uptake of Occupational Health provision.
Employers will be encouraged to take up Occupational Health offers to help employees access vital mental and physical health support at work, particularly for those working in small and medium-sized enterprises.
These proposals include introducing a national “health at work” standard for all employers to provide a baseline for quality Occupational Health provision, which includes guidance, an option to pursue accreditation, and additional government support services – for example outreach workers to support SMEs to meet the standards.
It also seeks views on developing longer-term workforce capacity to help meet any increased demand for Occupational Health services in the future by:
Encouraging NHS leavers or those who are considering a career change to pivot towards the Occupational Health specialism
Developing a longer-term, multi-disciplinary workforce to provide Occupational Health services
The consultation will also ask employers to share their examples of good Occupational Health provision to help inform other businesses and encourage them to provide the same.
Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, Mel Stride MP, said: “This Government is investing billions in getting people back to work and growing the economy. We need employers to keep playing their part too.
“Healthy businesses need healthy workers – employers will benefit from higher retention rates, more productive workers, and fewer work days lost due to sickness. Improving health in the workplace is a vital piece of the puzzle in our drive to increase employment.”
Minister for Disabled People, Health and Work, Tom Pursglove MP, said: “Long-term sickness is a huge contributor to economic inactivity, and while of course some people are unable to work, better accommodation of health problems in the workplace will open up a wider workforce to employers and support employees with a range of needs.
“Many small and medium-sized business owners already invest significantly in the health and wellbeing of their workforce, but this will be a gamechanger in identifying and removing obstacles to people with health conditions starting, staying and succeeding in work.”
To also help keep people in work, the government will today also publish a separate consultation looking at options to increase investment in Occupational Health services by UK wide employers through the tax system.
This follows its announcement at the Spring Budget where it committed to consult on incentivising greater provision of Occupational Health through the tax system.
The government wants to explore the case for providing additional tax relief to businesses on their Occupational Health costs.
In particular, the consultation asks respondents for their experiences of providing Occupational Health, including what services they provide and any barriers they experience. It also asks for evidence on the effectiveness of existing tax incentives and asks respondents for their views on the merits of expanding the existing Benefit-in-Kind relief, and thoughts on any alternative tax incentives.
Tax reliefs on Benefits-in-Kind are already available for certain occupational health services. This consultation will test if expanding these reliefs or introducing new ones could be an effective lever to achieve greater Occupational Health provision, as well as thoughts on any alternative tax incentives. The consultation will determine if expanding tax incentives is an appropriate measure to boost Occupational Health provision.
This is all a key component of the measures in the 2023 Spring Budget to grow labour market participation, reduce economic inactivity and get more people into work. The Department is helping millions to return to work with inactivity falling by 360,000 since the peak of the pandemic.
Long-term sickness is currently the main reason people of working-age give for being economically inactive, but just under half of workers have access to Occupational Health services. Over 90% of large employers offer Occupational Health support, compared to under a fifth of small ones.
Occupational Health provision can help employers provide work-based support to manage their employees’ health conditions, leading to better retention and return-to-work prospects, and improving business productivity, which can be adversely impacted by sickness absence.
Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, Steve Barclay said: “High quality Occupational Health support in more workplaces would not only help to reduce economic inactivity, but it can lead to a healthier, happier workforce.
“The individual health benefits are clear and by focusing on preventative measures, we can reduce the burden on the NHS and help to bring waiting lists down, which is one of the government’s top priorities.”
Angela Rowntree, Occupational Health Physician for the John Lewis Partnership, said: “At John Lewis Partnership we are moving away from reactively managing sickness to proactively supporting our Partners’ health and wellbeing at work.
“Our founder, Spedan Lewis understood this when he launched an in-house health service for all Partners in 1929 – nearly 20 years before the NHS was established – and we’re proud to be part of his legacy today, providing advice and support to help our Partners achieve their potential in the workplace.
“We welcome this new focus on ensuring other businesses and their employees are able to access better workplace health.”
The Occupational Health consultation will run until 23:59 on Thursday 12 October .
Scottish Labour MSP Sarah Boyack has branded the SNP government’s consultation on Council Tax a “scandal”, revealing that the changes would hit 92,971 households in Edinburgh.
The SNP government is currently consulting on plans to hike Council Tax for properties in bands E to H – which would hit 39% per cent of households in Scotland’s capital.
People in the area could face increases of up to around £800.
This consultation follows years of ‘brutal’ budget cuts to Council budgets by the SNP government.
Scottish Labour MSP Sarah Boyack said: “Years of brutal cuts by the SNP has local services in [AREA] at breaking point, and now the government wants to plug the gaps with eye-watering Council Tax hikes of up to around £800.
“It is a scandal that ordinary Scots are once again being asked to pay more while getting less in return.
“This damaging Council Tax bombshell will hit more than 92,000 households in Edinburgh during the worst cost of living crisis in decades, piling pressure on people already facing impossible financial decisions.
“Scots struggling with rising housing costs should be getting support from their government – but instead they are being asked to foot the bill for the SNP’s failure.
“Labour will stand up for people struggling with soaring living costs and fight for a fair deal for Edinburgh.”
BUT WHAT WOULD LABOUR ACTUALLY DO? REPLACE THE COUNCIL TAX? – Ed.
On Wednesday, the Scottish Government and COSLA released their anticipated (and widely leaked) consultation on Council Tax changes(writes Fraser of Allander Institute’s EMMA CONGREVE).
The proposals set out would see a repeat of the 2017 increases in band multipliers for properties in Band E – H with the consultation seeking views on whether the changes to the mulitpliers should be higher or lower, or not happen at all. .
Table 1 shows the proposed changes in the context of the original multipliers set out in 1993 and the reforms in 2017. The proposed changes would lead to an increase in the amounts paid of £139, £288, £485 and £781 per household (or dwelling in official council tax speak) for those in Band E, F, G & H respectively.
Table 1 – Council Tax Multipliers
Council Tax Band
Original multipliers
2017 reforms
New proposals
A
0.67
0.67
0.67
B
0.78
0.78
0.78
C
0.89
0.89
0.89
D
1.00
1.00
1.00
E
1.22
1.31 (+7.5%)
1.39 (+7.5%)
F
1.44
1.63 (+12.5%)
1.75 (+12.5%)
G
1.67
1.96 (+17.5%)
2.13 (+17.5%)
H
2.00
2.45 (+22.5%)
2.68 (+22.5%)
The consultation documents note a number of valid points, but fails to mention others that are fairly fundamental to the operation of the Council Tax. Here we cover some of the main issues.
A fundamentally flawed tax
Council Tax is a regressive tax. By regressive, this means that the average tax rate (the % of the tax base paid in tax) falls as the value of the tax base rises. For Council Tax, the tax rate depends on the property you live in, meaning the relevant tax base is property value (as of 1991 – an issue we’ll return to later). The highest valued properties pay a lower % of that value in their Council Tax bill.
The consultation document restates research that was completed as part of the 2015 Commission on Local Tax Reform that found that, in order for Council Tax in its current banded form to be progressive, the Band H rate would need to be in the order of 15x the Band A rate. Given this was based on 2013-14 property values, this figure may have since increased even further.
It is a shame that the government has not revisited the 2015 analysis to provide up-to-date figures. This is not an easy task (this author was involved in it the first time round!) but the data exists to repeat much of the Commission’s analysis. Updated figures would provide a better evidence base for judging their proposals.
However, updated figures would not change the overall position: the proposed changes would place Band H at 4x the Band A rate, far below values that would be required to become anything approaching progressive. The consultation document does not shy away from admitting this, stating that the proposals will not address ‘the fundamental regressivity of Council Tax’.
How do the proposed reforms link to ability to pay?
Although Council Tax is tied to property, it is income or savings that are required to pay the bill each year. As well as being regressive with respect to property, council tax is also regressive with respect to income. That is, as your income rises, the % of your income that you pay in the tax reduces.
There are some protections in the system to ensue those on the very lowest incomes do not pay some or any of their bill. The 2017 reforms also came with a condition that anyone who had income below the national average (median) would not pay any additional amounts if they were in Bands E – H. However, the regressivity with respect to income remains an issue that these reforms will not be able to address.
If we look at the impact of the proposals on the upper half of the income distribution (where we expect most people to be outwith any form of CTR protection), the average impact on Council Tax bills range from around an additional £200 – £320 a year.
In the context of some of the recent figures on increases on increases in mortgage increases, these figures look relatively sedate (although it may feel far from that, especially for those affected by mortgage increases too).
In addition, these numbers do not include any other form of discounts or exemptions which may reduce the additional amounts, such as the single person discount. Table 2 shows that, as a proportion of household income (and with the same caveats re not accounting for other discounts) this is between 0.7% and 0.5% (i.e. a half of 1%).
Table 2 also shows that although those higher up the income distribution will pay more, the proportion of income paid decreases as income rises: that is the proposed reforms will be regressive with respect to income. Those in the top 10% of income are likely to pay a lower proportion of their income in additional tax than those in the next income decile down.
Table 2 – Additional charges faced by the top half of the income distribution
Income decile group
Average additional charge
Average income (latest data)
Average additional charge as a % of household income
6
£201
£27,820
0.72%
7
£201
£31,928
0.63%
8
£222
£37,544
0.59%
9
£258
£46,384
0.56%
10 (i.e. top 10%)
£317
£64,896
0.49%
i Average income data is taken from the DWP Households Below Average Income dataset for 2021-2022. Average income in this table refers to a reference household with two adults and no children. Income is net of tax and transfers.
This is partly a result of incomes not being directly tied to value of the property you live in. Many critics of using property values as a basis for a recurring tax cite this issue, particularly for pensioners who may have lived in a home that has accrued in value over many years, but have a relatively low disposable income (although not low enough to qualify for Council Tax Reduction).
An additional factor relates to the fact that there are relatively few Band H properties where the highest charge applies: even in the top 10% of households less than 1% of households are in a Band H property, a similar proportion to households in the 9th income decile.
The elephant in the room: revaluation
An additional fundamental issue, absent from the consultation document, is the fact that the property values used to put properties into bands are based on 1991 values. Some properties have grown much faster in value than others since then.
That means that two properties that were in the same band in 1991 may now be worth vastly different sums of money, and if there was a revaluation today they would no longer be placed together in the same band.
The issue is further complicated by new builds where finding a comparable hypothetical 1991 value is difficult.
A quick look at any property website will provide you with all the evidence you need to illustrate the issue where property value and Council Tax Band are often quoted side by side.
For example, the market at the moment in Edinburgh:
A 2 bed ground floor flat for sale in the New Town for offers over £415,000 which is in Council Tax Band D (and therefore will not face the proposed additional charge)
A similarly sized 2 bed ground floor flat in Craigleith for offers over £210,000, which is in Council Tax Band E (which will face the proposed additional charge)
For those not familiar with Edinburgh geography, the locations are shown on the below map*.
This is not a one off. The Commission’s analysis in 2015 estimated that over half of all properties in Scotland would have changed band if revaluation had taken place in 2014.
We could speculate, at length, why revaluation has not happened. Scotland is not the only country that has struggled to find the political appetite to make it happen (the UK Government has done no better in England), but other parts of the UK have managed it in the last two decades.
What should be happening
Most people would agree that reforms to Council Tax need to go beyond tweaking multipliers. There are a number of options available, with a proportional tax on the value of a property being the majority view of the 2015 Commission, and indeed the previous Burt Commission that came up with similar proposals back in 2006.
However, any reform is contingent on the tax being levied on correct values. That means a revaluation is necessary. Indeed, it should be a prerequisite even for the type of tweaking that the Scottish Government did in 2017 and is proposing now given the majority of properties are likely to be in the wrong band.
To continue without revaluation is deeply unfair and to take forward reforms without a revaluation just rubs salt into the wounds.
*This map contains information from OpenStreetMap, which is made available here under the Open Database License (ODbL)
Your Voice Matters in Shaping Health and Social Care!
Consultation is open to all – click the link to submit your question today: 
