East Lothian first in Scotland to confirm 10% council tax hike
East Lothian Council has become the first Scottish local authority to confirm a double-digit council tax increase.A nationwide freeze on the levy is being lifted in April.East Lothian Council said a 10% rise was needed to maintain essential services and protect vulnerable residents. Councillors in the Scottish Borders last week agreed a draft plan with a 10% increase, saying they had no choice but to hike rates.
The Labour-led East Lothian Council agreed that tax hike as part of its budget for 2025-26. Councillors said they were facing financial pressures due to the local authority's growing population, increasing demand for services and pressure from government to deliver nationwide policies. Council leader Norman Hampshire said: "East Lothian's growth continues to put pressure on all parts of the council. "It is vital that we can sustain essential services to protect our most vulnerable residents and invest in education to give all children the best start in life."
As well as the tax rise, rents for council tenants will increase by 6.5%, an average of £5.25 a week. The budget included £8.9m of cuts over the next five years, with a commitment to finding further savings to close a funding gap. Councillors also agreed to invest more than £200m in infrastructure over the next five years, £1m in modernising council houses and a £7.5m increase for the body the oversees adult health and social care services.
Tax freeze
It is up to individual local authorities to set council tax rates, though they have been frozen or capped for much of the past 20 years.The Scottish government subsidised a freeze in 2024-25, though this ends in April.Several cash-strapped councils have already indicated that sizeable increases could be on the way.Councillors in the Scottish Borders say a proposed 10% hike is to protect essential services.East Lothian, Fife and Shetland councils have also considered increases of up to 10%, while Edinburgh, Midlothian and East Ayrshire are reportedly looking at 8%.The Scottish government has said its Budget for 2025-26, including an extra £1bn for local authorities, should negate the need for large council tax rises.Ministers are also hoping to cover 60% of the costs of the UK government's decision to increase employers' National Insurance contributions. Councils say the extra Holyrood funding still leaves them about £100m short, with "difficult decisions" to be made on how to cover the funding gap.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The National
an hour ago
- The National
The SNP must not complain about Hamilton by-election humbling
'We cry to God Almighty, how can we escape this agony? Fool, don't you have hands? Or could it be God forgot to give you a pair? Sit and pray your nose doesn't run! Or, rather just wipe your nose and stop seeking a scapegoat.' – Epictetus I'm not preaching a religious message at you; you can ignore that part if you so wish. But this was the quote that came up in my Daily Stoic book for June 5, and I really felt that by the end of the Hamilton by-election it had become immensely relevant. Labour's Davy Russell, who had taken no part in any debates throughout the campaign and had had minimal interaction with the media, clinched a shock victory at South Lanarkshire Council HQ, gaining the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse Holyrood seat from the SNP. The cheer was so loud journalists could not hear the exact number of votes Labour had received, but the fact it started with an eight was enough. The bookies had Labour in third place, and you could sense the relief as I heard one campaigner say: 'I actually feel quite emotional.' READ MORE: SNP activists reveal HQ silenced Reform strategy concerns Meanwhile, bullets have left guns slower than the SNP crew dispersed from the count floor. I wanted to hear from Katy Loudon, but she was nowhere to be seen. After a third defeat in a row – following her losses in Rutherglen at the 2023 by-election and General Election – you wonder whether it may be the last time we see her at a parliamentary count as a candidate. SNP minister Mairi McAllan (below) did, however, choose to criticise Labour's campaign as 'dreadful' in the aftermath, and that's where I feel Epictetus' words come in. (Image: PA) Yes, it was shocking Russell did not show up for debates, and it may seem unfair that after their popularity has plummeted so much on the back of countless broken promises they still won. But winners they are. That is sport sometimes. You don't always win by playing pretty. While Labour's tactics were risky and made Russell look like he was running scared, they seem to have played a clever game and protected their local candidate by going back to basics – chapping doors, speaking to people and figuring out exactly where their voters lived. Their Get Out the Vote campaign appeared to be hugely successful. READ MORE: How did Labour win Hamilton by-election with invisible man candidate? No matter what they might have thought of Labour's approach, all that matters is it worked, and the SNP simply cannot be overheard complaining. Their tactic of framing this as a two-horse race between them and Reform failed and perhaps it is proof that negative campaigning – positioning themselves as the only party that can beat Reform – is not going to work come the Holyrood election next year. By-elections are often outliers, and it is sometimes tricky to draw solid conclusions from them. What we can say is Reform are going to get MSPs next year and neither Labour nor the SNP can afford to be complacent. Labour, after all, won on less than a third of the vote. Both parties must keep a close eye on this new adversary but nor can they get too caught up in their web. The SNP became distracted by the new kids on the block and took their eye off their game in the process. It is time they focused on themselves and their message. If they can do that, the rest, they will hope, will take care of itself.
Rhyl Journal
an hour ago
- Rhyl Journal
Liberty loses bid to bring legal action against equalities body
The UK's highest court ruled in April that the words 'woman' and 'sex' in the Equality Act 2010 refer to a biological woman and biological sex, after a challenge against the Scottish Government by campaign group For Women Scotland. The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) is consulting on proposed amendments to part of its guidance, after interim guidance was published last month related to trans people's use of certain spaces including toilets and participation in sports following the judgment. The commission increased the length of time for feedback from an original proposal of two weeks to six weeks, but campaign group Liberty said that it should be at least 12 weeks, claiming the current period would be 'wholly insufficient' and unlawful. Liberty made a bid to bring a legal challenge over the length of the consultation, but in a decision on Friday afternoon Mr Justice Swift said it was not arguable. In his ruling, Mr Justice Swift said: 'There is no 12-week rule. The requirements of fairness are measured in specifics and context is important.' 'I am not satisfied that it is arguable that the six-week consultation period that the EHRC has chosen to use is unfair,' he added. At the hearing on Friday, Sarah Hannett KC, for Liberty, said in written submissions that the Supreme Court's decision 'has altered the landscape radically and suddenly' and potentially changes the way trans people access single-sex spaces and services. The barrister said this included some businesses preventing trans women from using female toilets and trans men from using male toilets, as well as British Transport Police updating its policy on strip searches, which have caused 'understandable distress to trans people'. Ms Hannett said a six-week consultation period would be unlawful because the EHRC has not given 'sufficient time' for consultees to give 'intelligent consideration and an intelligent response'. She told the London court: 'There is a desire amongst the bigger trans organisations to assist the smaller trans organisations in responding… That is something that is going to take some time.' Later in her written submissions, the barrister described the trans community as 'particularly vulnerable and currently subject to intense scrutiny and frequent harassment'. Ms Hannett added: 'There is evidence of distrust of both consultation processes and the commission within the community.' Lawyers for the EHRC said the legal challenge should not go ahead and that six weeks was 'adequate'. James Goudie KC, for the commission, told the hearing there is 'no magic at all in 12 weeks'. He said in written submissions: 'Guidance consistent with the Supreme Court's decision has become urgently needed. The law as declared by the Supreme Court is not to come in at some future point. 'It applies now, and has been applying for some time.' The barrister later said that misinformation had been spreading about the judgment, adding that it was 'stoking what was already an often heated and divisive debate about gender in society'. He continued: 'The longer it takes for EHRC to issue final guidance in the form of the code, the greater the opportunity for misinformation and disinformation to take hold, to the detriment of persons with different protected characteristics.' Mr Goudie also said that there was a previous 12-week consultation on the guidance at large starting in October 2024. Following the ruling, EHRC chairwoman Baroness Kishwer Falkner said the commission's approach 'has been fair and appropriate throughout'. She continued: 'Our six-week consultation period represents a balance between gathering comprehensive stakeholder input and addressing the urgent need for clarity. We're particularly encouraged by the thousands of consultation responses already received and look forward to further meaningful engagement through the rest of the process. 'The current climate of legal uncertainty and widespread misinformation serves nobody – particularly those with protected characteristics who rightly expect clarity about their rights. A swift resolution to this uncertainty will benefit everyone, including trans people.'
North Wales Chronicle
an hour ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Playgrounds must be saved to stop children being ‘glued to screens', MPs say
A cross-party group of MPs are backing plans which would ensure town halls keep play parks in good order, while housing developers would be required to provide 'high quality, accessible, inclusive' areas for play on new build sites. The amendment to the Planning and Infrastructure Bill is expected to be considered when the legislation returns to the Commons on Monday. Some 49 MPs from the Labour Party, the Greens, and the Liberal Democrats, as well independents, have so far signalled their support for the amendment to the Bill, which would introduce a 'play sufficiency duty' in England. Similar measures already exist in Scotland and Wales, and require councils to regularly assess whether there are enough playgrounds and other play facilities in their areas. The amendment, introduced by Labour MP Tom Hayes, would also 'require new developments to provide high-quality, accessible, inclusive play opportunities which incorporate natural features and are integrated within broader public spaces', and could see councils withhold planning permission if new estates lead to a net loss of play areas. Mr Hayes, the MP for Bournemouth East, told the PA news agency: 'When playgrounds are left to rot, and we have the power to put things right, what message is that sending to families? 'New Clause 82 is a common-sense, no-cost way to protect the play spaces we have today and ensure developments in the future focus on children. 'England must join Scotland and Wales in providing a play sufficiency duty, and my amendment does just that.' In January, the Labour MP led a Westminster Hall debate on playgrounds, where he emphasised the importance of play to children's development and said the Government need to be on the 'side of playing children', as well as the 'side of working people' . The debate was the first of its kind in seven years, he said, and the longest in 17 years, when a national play strategy was introduced by the previous Labour government. Mr Hayes added: 'Children sitting GCSEs this year weren't even alive the last time a government, a Labour government, produced a national play strategy and funded playgrounds. 'Today children end up indoors, glued to screens because they don't have safe play spaces. For families on tight budgets, paying for indoor play isn't an option. 'They're left with bare patches of tarmac where a climbing frame should be, or rusted swing frames that only remind them of what used to be. 'Children growing up in cramped flats rely on playgrounds. My amendment supports their right to play and provides inclusive play areas for children with special educational needs and disabilities, too.' The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government was contacted for comment.
