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)
Potential changes to the council tax system that could see those in the highest value properties asked to pay more if they can afford to have been published.
A joint consultation with COSLA is seeking views on plans to increase the amount paid by people in bands E, F, G and H. This aims to address criticism that the system is unfair, because at present those in the lower bands pay a higher proportion of the value of their property than those in the higher bands.
Around 75% of properties would be unaffected if the proposals, which could be phased in over a period of three years, were implemented. The Council Tax Reduction scheme would continue to offer lower bills for those unable to afford their council tax, regardless of what band they are in.
Public Finance Minister Tom Arthur said: “We have listened to calls for the council tax system to be made fairer, as presently more of the burden falls on those in the lower bands when considered as a proportion of the value of their property.
“The changes would only affect around a quarter of properties and even after they are taken into account, average council tax in Scotland would still be less than anywhere else in the UK.
“We know that many people are struggling with their finances and our Council Tax Reduction scheme is there to ensure nobody has to pay a Council Tax bill they cannot be expected to afford, regardless of what band they are in.
“I would encourage anyone who has views on these proposals to complete our consultation before it closes on 20 September 2023, to help us determine if they should be taken forward.”
Cllr Katie Hagmann, COSLA Resources Spokesperson, said: “For many years there have been calls to make the council tax system fairer. We are pleased to be working jointly with the Scottish Government to explore ways that we can achieve this. A fairer and more progressive Council Tax is what the proposals in this Consultation aim to do.
“This is a consultation about ways to make Council Tax more proportionate for everyone, so that householders pay their fair share towards the delivery of essential local services, including looking at those higher value properties.
“We want to hear from individuals, households, and communities to inform any redesign of this local tax, so would encourage people to respond during the 10 week consultation period.
“If you have a view on Council Tax, this joint consultation with Scottish Government gives you the chance to share your views and gives us a chance to make Council Tax fairer.”
Background
The consultation will run for 10 weeks from 12 July to 20 September 2023. Any changes would come into effect at the start of the 2024-25 financial year.
Even with the proposed increases taken into account, the average Band E to G charge would still be lower in Scotland than in England.
Band A
Band B
Band C
Band D
Band E
Band F
Band G
Band H
% change in average bill
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
7.5%
12.5%
17.5%
22.5%
Average charge in Scotland after increases
£944
£1,102
£1,259
£1,417
£2,001
£2,590
£3,259
£4,251
England 2023-24
£1,377
£1,606
£1,836
£2,065
£2,524
£2,983
£3,442
£4,130
Only around 28% of properties are in bands E-H and could be impacted by the proposed change.
The consultation has been endorsed by the Joint Working Group on Council Tax, which was established as a commitment in the 2021-22 Programme for Government and the Bute House agreement.
In 2015, the Commission on Local Tax Reform highlighted how the original multipliers – set out in the 1992 Local Government Finance Act – resulted in properties in Band H paying three times as much Council Tax as a property in Band A despite the fact that the Band H properties were estimated to be worth, on average, fifteen times the value of properties in Band A.
In 2023-24, Council Tax for a Band D property in different councils across Scotland varied between £1,261 and £1,515. In Scotland the average 2023-24 Band D rate (£1,417) is £648 less than in England (£2,065), and £463 less than in Wales (£1,879).
Cutting waste, increasing recycling and protecting the natural environment. These are some of the suggested benefits of a circular economy, but will a new Bill help make these changes happen?
The Circular Economy (Scotland) Bill will introduce measures the Scottish Government believes will help Scotland to move towards a circular economy. The Scottish Parliament’s Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee wants to know if these proposals will work in practice and whether they are sufficient to achieve that goal.
According to the Scottish Government, a circular economy would not only cut waste and reduce carbon emissions, but it would increase Scotland’s self-sufficiency and reduce reliance on international supply chains.
As well as creating a circular economy strategy, the Bill also contains powers to set additional charges for single use items as well as placing new duties on households and local authorities in terms of disposal of household waste and recycling.
Now the Committee want to hear from people across Scotland about their views of the Bill and whether it really will make a difference in reducing waste in Scotland.
Committee Convener Edward Mountain MSP said:“The Bill before us has ambitions for creating a circular economy which will protect Scotland’s natural environment and help tackle the climate emergency.
“But this Bill is wide ranging and will affect individuals, businesses and communities, so it is important to hear these voices to make sure the measures which are proposed work in practice.
“Covering areas such as household waste, littering and recycling this will affect many aspects of day-to-day life. So, it is vital that as many people as possible get involved in the discussion to help strengthen our scrutiny of the detail in the Bill.”
Social Care Minister Maree Todd will join the first of a series of events where people can co-design the new National Care Service.
Today’s event at Stirling’s Albert Halls will allow carers, people who access and deliver care, including the workforce, and anyone with an interest to contribute to how a new National Care Service could work.
Since the regional forums were announced last month, more than 600 have signed up to take part in-person and online, with additional capacity already being made for the Glasgow event next week.
Ms Todd said: “We want everyone to have access to consistently high-quality social care support across Scotland, whenever they might need it.
“There are unique demands across the country, which is why we’re going to different areas over the next 18 months, ensuring communities across Scotland can help design a National Care Service tailored to local needs.
“Having listened to people who access and deliver care support – both paid and unpaid – as well as care providers, unions and the third sector during the parliamentary process, these meetings will allow us to work with people who access care support, have a loved one that receives care, or works in the sector to think about how to meet the needs we have heard about. This will help us ensure the legislation reflects what people need and know as it progresses through Parliament.”
“I am pleased that there has been such interest in signing up, Spaces are still available, with online events providing another option for those who want to have their voices heard if they can’t make it in person.
An inquiry seeking to find out the key issues facing healthcare services in Scotland’s remote and rural areas has been launched by the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee.
The Committee wants to hear from members of the public and staff about their experiences of remote and rural healthcare services. They are keen to find out what specific challenges people in these areas face and what can be done to improve services in these areas.
National Records of Scotland data has revealed that the areas with the greatest population growth over the last decade were accessible rural areas. 10.6% more people lived in these areas in mid-2021 than in mid-2011.
Rural areas also tend to have specific demographic challenges when it comes to demand for healthcare, with often a lower proportion of people aged 16 to 44 but a higher proportion of people aged 45 and over (particularly those 65 and above).
Launching the inquiry, Clare Haughey MSP, Convener of the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee, said:“Scotland’s geography means much of its healthcare is accessed and delivered in remote and rural areas and that’s why the Committee is keen to hear of the specific issues impacting healthcare services in these locales.
“We want to hear the experiences’ of individuals and representatives from remote and rural areas, and from those who work or have worked in remote and rural healthcare, on what they think the particular challenges facing the sector are.
“Our inquiry aims to provide a platform for the views of those in remote and rural areas to be heard and our Committee is keen to hear from as wide a range of organisations and individuals as possible.
“Sharing your views will help the Committee better understand the varied and particular issues facing rural and remote healthcare services and help our scrutiny of the Scottish Government and other key stakeholders in their approach to delivering healthcare in these areas.”
