Full details from Council’s budget setting debate

AMMENDMENTS
In his speech opening the budget debate, Cllr MacKay also stated that he supported the retention of the additional funds in Comhairle reserves as he was “concerned” about the deficit in the Integration Joint Board’s (IJB) budget, which may have impacts on the Comhairle’s finances.
Two amendments to the budget motion were put forward at the meeting, one from the Comhairle’s SNP group, which would, if successful, have seen no increase in council tax rates this year, and the removal from the budget of the planned service cuts, with the short-fall in the budget being met from Comhairle reserves.  
The SNP group’s motion had also proposed that sums be ear-marked by the Comhairle to be made available to the Integration Joint Board (IJB) for dental services at Sacred Heart Care Home, Daliburgh (£80k), and for Bethesda Hospice (£100k) for use in the event that the IJB does not fund the facility.
The second amendment came from Cllr Charlie Nicolson (Steornabhagh A Deas), who proposed a 2 per-cent rise in council tax with the removal of specific items from the Comhairle’s service savings plan, including the closure of public toilets in Perceval Square in the centre of Stornoway, and with £515k being used to balance the budget from Comhairle reserves.
After debate in the chamber, both amendments were lost, and the Leader’s budget motion was passed.

PREPOSTEROUS AND OUTRAGEOUS
Opening the budget debate, Cllr MacKay said: “Last year, I told you that I believed we faced greater challenges than the Comhairle had faced in its history, and we remain in such an environment. Despite the suggestion that austerity is behind us it remains the case that since 2010 the Comhairle has seen a funding reduction of 14 per-cent, the biggest of any council in Scotland, amounting to £16m. 
“The new monies announced yesterday, thanks to an agreement with the Green Party, mean that we will have nearly £0.3m less cash to spend on our core services (an improvement of some £0.7m on the original settlement).
“The Comhairle strives to deliver”, the Leader continued, “the best services it can for our communities, educating our children; looking after the vulnerable; keeping our roads safe; and recycling our waste. We will continue to do our best to work with the Scottish Government and our communities to minimise the effect on services and offset the impact on our economy.”
“Our transformation programme seeks to tackle the reduction in core funding not just by cutting but by redesigning services, empowering our communities, and growing alternative income, both revenue and capital.
“Nonetheless I am recommending that we use the additional flexibility that the Scottish Government has given us to raise Council Tax by 4.84 per-cent which, for 9 in every 10 households on our islands will be no more than £1.01 a week.
“There remains a risk we may need to revisit our budget following the Scottish Government and UK budget approvals in early March but in the meantime this budget represents a reasonable and responsible continuation of the journey we started in 2018 and I recommend that we continue to work together to implement these recommendations.”
Cllr MacKay rejected support for the SNP group’s amendment which he said was “preposterous” and which, he claimed “flew in the face of prudence”, whilst the motion was “fair and sensible”, he would not be “sending more time on a proposal that is outrageous”.   

CONTINGENCIES ARE TOO HIGH
In moving the SNP group’s amendment to the Leader’s motion, Cllr Gordon Murray (Steornabhagh A Tuath) stated that their proposals “had been guided” by the findings of an Audit Scotland report last year that stated, Cllr Murray said that the Comhairle “contingencies and centrally held budgets have been set too high”, and claimed that the Comhairle was rising council tax by the maximum level permitted whilst under-spending its budget in successive years. 
“We are underspending public money and cutting services”, Cllr Murray stated and invited councillors “to just let that sink in”. 
“We underspend on one hand, and on the other we raise our council tax bu the maximum - not because we need to but because we can”, Cllr Murray stated, and added:
“The Leader talks about doing more with less, but this is surely doing less with more.”
Cllr Murray asked why the additional money from the Scottish Government was “going straight into balances”, and why, he stated: “ the desire to make cuts when we have the money.”
Cllr Murray concluded: “ Members, these cuts will cause a crisis in households, along with a council tax rise they have social housing rent increases, and why are we putting our people in this position?”
On the issue of funding for Bethesda Hospice, Cllr Murray said that the service was “vital” to local communities and expressed concerns that the current issues around funding for the hospice had taken more than a year to resolve. 
“What will happen”, Cllr Murray asked, “ when [the hospice] closes? Will families fly off to hospices on the mainland?’
Cllr Murray Murray closed his speech moving the SNP group’s amendment by saying that the Comhairle “should show our communities that we want Bethesda to continue providing our most vulnerable, our dying people with the best care possible.”

DENTAL SERVICES

The issue of funding for dental services in Daliburgh, Cllr Murray deferred to Cllr Calum MacMillan (Barraigh, Bhatarsaigh, Eiriosgaigh agus Uibhist a Deas).
In seconding the Leader’s budget Motion, Cllr Alasdair MacLeod (Sgire An Rubha) said that “the unpalatable truth for Cllr Murray, is that the Scottish Government had been slashing the Comhairle’s budget for years”, and, Cllr MacLeod concluded: “we have been prudent and sensible, but we are still facing a short-fall.”
In seconding Cllr Murray’s amendment, Cllr MacMillan focussed on the issue of dental services in Uist, saying that he felt that the redesign of dental services at Uist Hospital were “a wedge to close the surgical facility”, and that a vote for that was a “vote to close the hospital”.
Cllr MacMillan concluded: “I don’t dispute that a reduction is coming, but we are seeing reductions in our populations and this amendment addresses that reduction.”
Cllr Norrie MacDonald (Sgire An Rubha) raised the issue of what he described as the ‘underspends’ in the SNP government’s own budget, and asked Cllr Murray to explain to him why if the Scottish Government can have an underspend in its budget, that was not allowed for the Comhairle?

NO RESERVES LEFT

Cllr Donald Crichton (Loch a’ Tuath) claimed that if the Comhairle had followed the advice of Cllr Murray in 2013 and used its balances to fund budget deficits at that time, there would be no reserves left now.
Cllr Crichton stated: “If we had used our reserves in 2013, we would now be at rock bottom and having to issue compulsory redundancies.”
“It is right”, Cllr Crichton concluded, “that the Comhairle carries on in a prudent vein until the government starts investing in local, government , and we have to show responsibility to, and leadership to, those we represent.”
On the issue of Bethesda Hospice, Cllr Crichton said that all councillors cared about the facility, and said it was “reckless and irresponsible to suggest that the IJB wanted to close Bethesda”, and suggested that Cllr Murray’s remarks were”outrageous” and “causing alarm” in local communities.
Cllr Calum MacLean (Loch a’ Tuath) said that he was not “going to let the Scottish Government off the hook” over the funding levels of local authorities, but said that he agreed with Cllr Murray in saying that it was wrong for the Comhairle “to carry such high reserves” and then to set a council tax increase at 4.8 per-cent. 
“Households are straining every muscle to make ends meet”, Cllr MacLean stated, “we have to be very careful about on whom we are levelling these cuts - everyone is struggling and we are going too far.”
Cllr Kenny John MacLeod (An Taobh Siar Agus Nis) replied saying that if the Comhairle used its balances to underpin core services those balances “would not be there next year, or the year after or the year after.”
On the issue of the funding of Bethesda Hospice Cllr  Kenny John MacLeod said: 
“I think we are all empathetic to the services of Bethesda […] Bethesda has not been denied any funding and nobody in this chamber would see Bethesda closed. They are not in that position.”

EFFORT TO EMBARRASS

Cllr Paul Steele (Barraigh, Bhatarsaigh, Eiriosgaigh agus Uibhist a Deas) addressing the proposed funding for dental services in Daliburgh in the SNP Group’s amendment said that in 2018 he had campaigned to retain the existing three-site model for dental services in Uist but the IJB had decided to adopt the centralised ‘hub’ model. 
Cllr Steele stated the IJB’s standing orders did not permit a review or amendment of that decision for a year. 
“When the Comhairle were setting the 2018/19 budget”, Cllr Steel continued, “the SNP group put forward an amendment that include the [proposal} that £500k be made available to the IJB to fund capital expenditure should the IJB resolve that the sum is required to support the ongoing Uist and Benbecula service redesign. That amendment wasn’t accepted. 
“Cllr Murray is well aware”, Cllr Steele continued, “that capital expenditure, as is needed for the dental works in South Uist, sits with NHSWI and not the IJB so had the Comhairle given the IJB £500k as requested for capital works on Uist dental it would have been passed from the IJB to NHSWI to install the dental hub at the U&B hospital with the loss of the theatre facilities.
“Fast forward to today and we see another amendment to this time give £80k to provide dental services at sacred Heart with the caveat that should the IJB not agree to provide dental services at Daliburgh then the allocation would be retained by the Comhairle.
“…I sincerely hope that the offer of £80k to do the opposite of the recently taken policy decision is not a cynical effort by Cllr Murray to embarrass myself and my colleagues knowing full well that this amendment has no traction. 
“There are other factors that might alter the progression of the dental hub model, finances being one of them, but until that situation arises we can’t be allocating money that could be spent on other services on the off chance that a decision that took years to reach might be overturned.” 
Cllr Steel concluded: “I do however thank the SNP group for continuing to raise the subject of the Uist dental redesign and hope that they are encouraging their colleagues at Holyrood to look at it too and to step in if they share the SNP councillors views on the centralisation of services.”


CONTINGENCIES OF £3.5m and BALANCES FROM UNDERSPENDS OF £3.1m
Cllr Rae MacKenzie (Steornabhagh A Deas) returned to the issue of Scottish Government budget balances and underspends and claimed that there was “no comparison” to be made between the Comhairle and the government as the government’s balances were less than 1 per-cent of its budget. 
Highlighting what he claimed were the differences between contingencies and balances, with contingencies being sums set aside by the Comhairle for emergency or crisis situations, “The Comhairle”, Cllr MacKenzie stated, “has contingencies of £3.5m and balances coming from underspends in its services of £3.1m. This budget has 39 lines of different cuts to services, and they are detrimental to our services.” 
“We are told”, Cllr MacKenzie concluded, “to save for a rainy day, but our balances have nothing to do with those contingencies, so why are they more than 3 per-cent of our budget?”
Entering the debate on the SNP Group’s amendment, Cllr Angus McCormack (Steornabhagh A Deas) said that the Comhairle’s budgets had been cut “year after year”, and contradicted  Cllr Murray’s claims over Audit Scotland’s conclusions on the Comhairle’s budget. 
Cllr McCormack claimed that Audit Scotland had instead “applauded” the Comhairle over the way it had handled service redesign. He said:
“It is prudent for departments to have money for the services they plan and provide. We are being sensible but every year, the SNP group brings forward convoluted and long amendments.
“Even this budget leaves us with just £1.5m in balances - the lowest we have ever had - and that worries me greatly.”
“Throughout Scotland”, Cllr McCormack concluded:  “SNP councils are raising their council tax by the highest levels available because they know, if they don’t, they can’t go back to the Scottish Government later and say that they haven’t got enough resources.”

CHILD POVERTY REDUCTION
Returning to the issue of the alleged hardship the proposed increase in council tax may bring to the local community, Cllr McCormack claimed that child poverty in the islands “had reduced by half due to the the work this council and its partners had done”, and asked: “Will the SNP {group] now work with us rather than bring forward these silly amendments?”
Convenor, Cllr Norman A MacDonald, then rejoined the debate stating, in terms of committing the extra funding from the Scottish Government to changes in the original budget proposals: “We are aware that the UK government is going to make a decision on its funding for Edinburgh, so we need to hang-fire for that and not lock ourselves in at this stage. It is just a pity that we didn’t have all of the information  before we made our plans.”
Cllr John A MacIver (Loch a’ Tuath), then asked, if the Comhairle receives extra funds as a result of Westminster’s increased funding for the Scottish Government “will that go straight to [Comhairle] balances as well?”
In summing up on the debate, amendment proposer, Cllr Murray said that he was “in no way” making a “cynical attempt” to undermine the work of Cllr  Steele on the IJB, “We are trying to be helpful”, Cllr Murray concluded.
In response to Cllr Norrie MacDonald’s observations, Cllr Murray said that the Scottish Government had 1 per-cent of its budget in balances, and claimed that Cllr MacDonald “was now going to vote to keep the Comhairle’s at 5 per-cent.”
Cllr Murray rounded up his contribution by saying that the Comhairle “was miles ahead” of other local authorities in Scotland in terms of the size of its reserves, and that that was “embarrassing”. 
“All we are saying”, he concluded, “is that we have extra money, let’s use it on our services.”
A vote was then taken on the SNP Group’s amendment to the Leader’s budget motion, with the original motion being carried unchanged by 19 votes to 5.

CONSIDERING THE SECOND AMENDMENT
The debate then shifted to consider Cllr Nicholson’s amendment.
The Leader again moved the motion for the budget saying that he could not accept Cllr Nicolson’s proposals because of its council tax element. He said that he was “not persuaded” by claims that the proposed 4.8 per-cent rise in council tax would “cause greater poverty” and that his motion would maintain the Western isles as the authority with the lowest council tax rates in Scotlands. 
In moving his amendment, Cllr Nicolson stated that he was proposing a 2 per-event increase in council tax, and that he was “very happy” that the Western Isles has the lowest council tax in Scotland.
“So it should have”, Cllr Nicolson stated, “where else in Scotland does an area have the cost of ferries, even with RET, the cost of air tickets even with ADS. The cost of carriage and the high cost of fuel and heating oil. Where else has such high costs for food, for building materials.”
“We have”, Cllr Nicolson continued, “the highest levels of fuel poverty in Scotland and the lowest incomes in Scotland. 
“We say that the council tax increase would be a pound a week to most families, but we are increasing  the cost for families of sport centre membership, we are reducing child care grants , increasing [child care] charges by 25 per-cent for the under 3s. We are reducing Gaelic grants for Mods so children will have to pay more.“

CONCERN FOR TOURISM
Cllr Nicolson’s proposal did have the support of many councillors who expressed concern about the impact on tourism and the need for facilities for the growing market of cruise ship visits to Stornoway, with the Stornoway bus station set for being repurposed as an unstaffed public convenience.
The meeting was told that the item was one of those subject to an impact assessment, and the Leader stated that it could be re-examined by the Comhairle when that assessment was complete. 
Council Convenor, Cllr Norman A MacDonald (Sgir’ Uige Agus Ceann A Tuath Nan Loch), said that the issue of the future of the bus station had been on committee agendas for more than eight years and that it was now time for that issue to be resolved. 
Cllr Nicolson also moved to remove plans in the budget to cancel a budget that provides matched funding for community groups seeking the Comhairle’s backing in grant applications to other funding bodies. 
The Leader of the Comhairle outlined that the removal of the budget heading from the Comhairle’s accounts did not mean that the funding would not be available for community groups, but that the fund monies would be retained in the Comhairle’s main reserves in a single unified budget.  
Both the revenue fund and the public toilets issue received the support of many councillors in the chamber, but many were also unable to support Cllr Nicolson’s amendment on the basis of the reduced council tax rise.


FAMILIES SUFFERING IN SILENCE

Cllr MacLean re-entered the debate saying that he found Cllr Nicolson’s amendment to be “a reasonable proposal”.
“Why”, Cllr Maclean asked, “are we agreeing to a council tax increase of 4.8 per-cent?  It’s the dictate of the Scottish Government - with-holding funds on one hand and then telling us to raise council tax by the maximum amount. I think 2 per-cent is a very reasonable middle ground.”
Cllr Norrie MacDonald then asked the Convenor to confirm that the Comhairle still had a fund to relieve hardship caused by any council tax increase, which the Convenor confirmed. 
Cllr MacDonald said: “I am not embarrassed when I hold up what we have done in comparison to the Scottish Government. No one goes away from here with anything but a heavy heart. It’s tough. We are the front-facing people in our communities. I hope that information gets to our communities that austerity is being imposed on us year after year. I hope the general public understands that this is not about saving for a rainy day, its raining here all the time.”  
In summing up in favour of his amendment, Cllr Nicolson said that many families in the islands “were suffering in silence.” 
“There is a middle ground”, Cllr Nicolson concluded: “we need to be supporting our families and we should go for a 2 per-cent council tax rise. At the end of the day, we have to support the vulnerable and those suffering in silence in our communities.”
In reply, and in closing the debate for the motion, Comhairle Leader, Cllr Roddie Mackay said: “ I don’t share the negative view Cllr Nicolson suggests. In terms of delivering services we need to generate income  to have the services that help the vulnerable. The burden of the 4.8 per-cent increase will largely fall on those who are not vulnerable.”
A vote on Cllr Nicolson’s motion was then taken with  16 supporting the Leader’s budget motion, and 8 councillors backing Cllr Nicolson’s amendment. And with that vote the Leader’s motion was passed.