"South of Scotland can only afford one council" - claim

DOUGLAS SHEPHERD writes

The proposal for a merger between Scottish Borders Council and NHS Borders has been greeted with virtually 100% opposition from local residents who would be affected by the formation of a single public authority for the area.

Not Just Sheep & Rugby wondered if there would be a more favourable reaction to an alternative idea for a single local authority covering the Borders and Dumfries and Galloway, leaving the respective health services to work out their own future arrangements.

Below we publish in full a submission to the Scottish Government which sets out the case for a South of Scotland local government commission aimed at saving money while at the same time giving the neglected area a much stronger voice. We make no comment as to its merits or disadvantages.

A SINGLE LOCAL AUTHORITY FOR THE SOUTH OF SCOTLAND

It has been reported that a group of individuals (presumably councillors and officials) at Scottish Borders Council (SBC) is floating an idea for a single public authority for the Borders by amalgamating the council and Borders Health Board (BHB).

The published papers which may form the basis for a submission to the Scottish Government as part of the Local Governance consultation are 100% positive about a merger without any mention of pitfalls or drawbacks, and there is no detail about how savings might be achieved.

A combination of health and local government services would be fraught with difficulties. For example, it would surely be dangerous if councillors with particular political views found themselves in charge of hospitals, primary care and other services currently delivered by an apolitical health board.

The last thing the Borders requires is a politically run authority with control over £120 million of health expenditure as well as the £254 million municipal revenue budget it already administers in line with party political policies and priorities.

The weaknesses in the local economy such as low wages and low economic activity as outlined in the SBC document proves conclusively that the Scottish Borders is too small to justify having its own local authority with 34 councillors and 125 members of staff on salaries in excess of £50,000 a year and paid for by local taxpayers. The inflated levels of remuneration paid to senior officers, ranging from £74,000 to £134,000, are completely out of step with the state of the regional economy.

The area needs a much more radical solution than a simple coming together of the two largest Borders employers into one huge new organisation with potentially conflicting interests. Such a merger sounds like an exercise in self-preservation.

Surely it is time the Scottish Government and others recognised that a one-size-fits-all system of local government might not be suitable for every area of the country. Perhaps a bold change is needed by scrapping the moribund system of governance in southern Scotland and replacing it with a more dynamic model.

The establishment of a South of Scotland Enterprise Agency (SOSEA) covering the Scottish Borders and Dumfries & Galloway offers a unique chance to build on the efforts and achievements of the South of Scotland Alliance. That fairly loose relationship forged by representatives from the two local government areas has already produced a South of Scotland Rural Regional Programme incorporating the Borders Railway/Central Borders Business Park, Mountain Biking – “Refreshing a world class product”, a Strategic Master plan for the M74 Corridor, and ambitious plans for the Stranraer Waterfront. But for too long the south has been neglected while the Highlands has received a disproportionate share of attention and investment.

There is an opportunity to build on the alliance by creating a single council/commission for the south of Scotland. It would give the entire region a much louder voice in the clamour for revenue and capital resources from the Scottish Government. And the partnership with the new SOSEA would provide a strong platform to develop the ailing economy and attract major inward investment.

The reformed local government unit would still be dwarfed by Highland Council in terms of land mass – some 11,000 square kilometres compared to Highland’s 30,600 square kilometres. So an amalgamated local authority for the south could not be ruled out on logistical grounds.

It would serve a population of 262,000 people (SBC 114,000 and Dumfries & Galloway 148,000). It would have a combined annual revenue budget of £564 million (Borders £254 million: Dumfries & Galloway £310 million) and an annual capital budget of £109 million (Borders £36 million [limited by a vast underspend in 2017/18]: Dumfries & Galloway £73 million).

In recent years reduced funding from the Scottish Government whose own budget has been downsized by the UK Government has resulted in local authorities claiming they have had no alternative but to cut front line services. Many of these public services will never be restored even if the levels of financial support were to recover.

But the jobs at the top of the local government pyramid along with the number of elected members representing council wards has escaped scrutiny and the cold winds of austerity. As mentioned earlier SBC has 125 individuals on the payroll who are paid £50,000 or more. The total in Dumfries and Galloway is 219. The nine most senior officers in D&G between them account for £901,000. An amalgamated council would surely require far less of these high earners providing one area for economies. After all many millions of pounds have been spent in both areas on exit packages for dozens of well-paid officials, and the two councils continue to function without them.

Now it is time to turn to the number of councillors and the costs involved in keeping them in post. So far as SBC is concerned there are 34 elected members representing 11 wards whose salaries and expenses totalled £748,000 in 2017/18. A group of so-called 15 senior councillors with added responsibilities (e.g. portfolio holder) received £286,319 while the council leader was paid £33,857.

In Dumfries & Galloway the council currently has 43 councillors representing 12 wards at a total cost in 2017/18 of £890,000. Fourteen senior councillors were paid between them £282,000 with the council leader receiving a salary of £25,388, a notably smaller amount than that paid to the leader of SBC even though D&G has a larger territory and significantly more residents.

It can be argued that both local authorities are over-governed with a total of 77 elected members between them. Highland Council functions with 74 councillors. In the current financial climate it is impossible to justify having three or even four councillors representing a single ward. So here is one radical proposal, again aimed at saving money.

There should be a total of 30 full time councillors or commissioners - each paid £30,000 – to run the new authority…12 for the current SBC area and 18 for Dumfries & Galloway based on the respective populations. They would not be allowed to hold other jobs thereby encouraging more young people and the man and woman in the street to get involved in local democracy. The annual cost of these administrators would be £900,000 – around £700,000 less than the current combined army of councillors. Even when expenses and responsibility payments are added the bill will be less than the current one. No doubt the usual suspects will say such a slimmed down system would be unworkable.

 It can be left to the experts in local government affairs to identify and calculate other areas where cost savings could be achieved by amalgamating the two councils.