I’m wondering if you’re one of the frozen: one of the lucky ones (although we’ll return to that word “lucky” later) who will benefit from the SNP’s council tax freeze or one of those who’s facing a rise of 7, 8, 9% or more? Personally, I’m still waiting to hear my fate: frozen or unfrozen, not sure yet.
You’ll remember how the freeze was first announced no doubt: October last year, SNP conference, Labour creeping up in the polls. Humza Yousaf stands up (with no warning to the councils, mind) and announces that council tax will not rise in 2024. Sound of clapping. The decision was, he said, the SNP delivering for people when they need it the most.
On the face of it, it’s an attractive message, of course it is: you won’t pay more. But not only did Mr Yousaf’s announcement go down badly with the councils, sound of no clapping, it has started to unravel this week in a way that exposes a long and difficult truth: we’ve all been paying the price for Scotland’s council tax and the Scottish Government’s failure to fix it.
For a while, the SNP appeared to acknowledge the problem; when they first came to power in 2007, they said they were committed to replacing the tax, something they’ve repeated many times. Indeed, Mr Yousaf had the cheek to say it again in his speech despite nothing having happened for 17 years. “We’re committed to fundamentally reforming local taxation,” he said, “and we will re-energise out work to do that.”
You may believe Mr Yousaf when he says those words, in which case you have all my love and best wishes. But we should contrast the First Minister’s remarks (“I can announce to the people of Scotland that your council tax will be frozen”) with what is actually happening for some taxpayers (“Argyll and Bute votes to raise council tax by 10%”). It highlights a fundamental, and by this point probably wilful, misrepresentation of council tax, how the Government operates it, and the consequences for those that pay it.
Let’s take the “delivering for people when they need it most” bit first. Mr Yousaf prefaced his announcement about the freeze with a bit about the cost-of-living crisis and how people are filled with dread about bills going up, the implication being the freeze will help. But the Institute for Public Policy Research, among others, has made it clear people in poverty will see virtually none of the savings that will come to taxpayers from the freeze. In fact, it’s the middle classes and above who will benefit most.
Read more: Mark Smith: Adult Human Male: a sign of hope?
And there’s a deeper problem: not only will the freeze fail to help people on the lowest incomes, unfairness is built into the tax in the first place. A 2015 Scottish Government commission on tax reform found houses in the highest tax band paid three times as much as those in the lowest ones, despite being worth on average about 15 times more. This is something the SNP used to acknowledge, hence Mr Yousaf’s passing commitment to “re-energise” its efforts at reform, even though we don’t believe him.
Sadly, there’s another sharp edge to the SNP’s freeze for people on lower incomes. The Scottish Government says it’s going to give the councils extra money to cover the freeze but Cosla, the council umbrella body, says the money won’t be enough to cover their budget shortfalls. Likely consequence? Further cuts to services on which people on lower incomes are more likely to rely.
This is essentially why Argyll and Bute Council is the first council to rebel against the freeze by voting this week to raise their council tax by 10%; the leader Robin Currie said it was the only way to prevent cuts. People who live in other areas that have agreed to the freeze – Glasgow, Borders, and so on – may think they’ve had a lucky escape, but will they change their minds when the council starts to cut services or (more likely) starts charging for services that are currently free? Still feeling lucky?
The fact that Mr Yousaf felt he could announce the freeze last October, and assume that councils including Argyll and Bute would fall into line, is also something we should be worrying about. I remember speaking about this to the former MSP Andy Wightman, who was a member of that commission on tax reform, and his take was that central government in Scotland has far too much control over what, how, and why local councils spend money. He pointed out that a council tax freeze like Scotland’s would be illegal in Germany because they have a law forbidding central government from interfering in the fiscal affairs of its municipalities.
Read more: Mark Smith: What about the people still on the edge Mr Yousaf?
The obvious answer would be to have a similar law in Scotland, but don’t hold your breath Mrs: the Scottish Government is effectively bullying councils into agreeing to the freeze and the tactic is already working with some of them (Argyll and Bute excepted, good on them). The problem may be that a myth persists that Scotland is one of the most devolved countries in Europe but it isn’t and it’s hard to avoid the conclusion that the SNP likes it that way.
But we can still dream of how it could be, how it should be. Imagine a system for example, like Norway’s, in which most income tax is collected by local authorities and some of it is remitted to central government. Imagine as well if councils could decide what sort of tax was right for them and how and where they would like to spend it. But imagine, most of all, if Mr Yousaf really meant what he said in his speech last October: a commitment to reform local taxation and make it better and fairer. Imagine that.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel