Warning as Glasgow faces biggest spending gap in Scotland
The city has a spending gap of £116million for the next two years from April 2026.
The details are included in an Accounts Commission report into the finances of Scotland's local authorities.
READ NEXT:Keir Starmer signals change to allow more pensioners to get winter fuel payment
The finance watchdog has said that councils are facing greater spending pressures and resources from the Scottish Government are not matching the growing demand and pressures from inflation and rising staff costs.
It said mounting pressures from inflation, increasing costs, and demand are exceeding the Scottish Government's additional investment in Scotland's councils.
The organisation said longer-term change in the way services are delivered is happening but must accelerate and action is also needed to better understand the impacts on the most vulnerable communities.
To meet the gap, councils are raising council tax, increasing fees and charges and making cuts.
Glasgow City Council expects to raise the most from fees and charges in 2025/26, with around £210.6m projected to be raised, around 10% of its approved 2025/26 revenue budget.
READ NEXT:Huge £500m masterplan for housing and jobs revealed for Shawfield
Income from Glasgow City Council's Neighbourhood, Regeneration and Sustainability services is projected to increase by three per cent to £111 million, driven by the fees and charges in place for 2025/26.
One of the ways the council is raising cash is through increasing council tax by 7.5% but it only raises £20.2m.
The Accounts Commission said: 'Council tax only represents a small proportion of a council's overall revenue budget, making up around 19% of total council income across Scotland, with the exact proportion varying across council areas.
'On this basis, for example, a 10% increase in council tax rates will not represent an overall 10% increase in council budgets, but only increase available funding by 1.9%.
'Council tax increases can also disproportionately impact lower-income households, although the Council Tax Reduction Scheme is in place to support a range of claimants.'
The Accounts Commission said councils need to have conversations with citizens about how services will be delivered and they cannot rely on government funding to match rising costs.
READ NEXT:We've been 'strung along': Anger at Ruchill Community Centre decision
Derek Yule, Member of the Accounts Commission, said: 'There's a growing expectation gap. Councils don't have enough money to meet current demand, at a time when local communities are being asked to contribute more through increases in council tax and charges for some services.
'Councils need to provide clearer budget information and work with communities to determine how services will be delivered in the future. These conversations won't be easy.
'With public finances tightening, however, not all cost increases faced by councils can be met by government funding.
'Local action is needed now to find solutions to immediate and future financial challenges. This means difficult decisions on what services can be delivered and making major changes in how they are delivered.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scotsman
an hour ago
- Scotsman
Readers' Letters: After by-election win Labour needs to sell message of positive change
Labour's surprise win in the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election had readers talking Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... Reform UK's 26 per cent vote share at the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election is a warning that the populist party with a toxic ideology can make inroads in next year's Holyrood election. Political expert Sir John Curtice estimates Nigel Farage's party could come third, with 18 seats, based on recent polling (your report, 2 June). He said Reform's success is 'very bad news' for the Tories who polled just 6 per cent at the by-election. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Unfounded remarks by Farage about Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar allegedly favouring the Pakistani community were condemned as racist by all major parties in Scotland apart from the Tories, who remain toothless against a party that has overtaken them in the polls and threatens to render them obsolete. The recent resignation of Bellshill-born Reform party chairman Zia Yusuf, after its newest MP suggested the banning of the burka, is a blow to Farage. This follows Reform's controversial views on banning asylum seekers from Reform-held councils, an unworkable net zero migration policy and the recent comments against Mr Sarwar. Scottish Labour Deputy leader Jackie Ballie, Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar and Davy Russell, newly elected Scottish Labour MSP for Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse yesterday (Picture: Jeff) Reform has no place in Scottish democracy as it is difficult to justify any support for a party with outdated views on multiculturalism and climate change. Labour must show that Hamilton was not a blip to defeat two decades of failed SNP policies and the toxic politics of Reform. Voters are more likely to engage if there is tangible hope of positive change. Neil Anderson, Edinburgh Counting chickens? While Labour's victory in the Hamilton by-election on Thursday seemingly points to the party winning the Scottish Parliament elections next year, if I were Anas Sarwar I wouldn't be sizing up the curtains of Bute House just yet. The seat was won comfortably by the SNP in the last Scottish Parliament election in 2021 and is just the sort of seat Labour needs to win if Sarwar is to become Scotland's next First Minister. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad The SNP has made little progress in restoring its fortunes following its heavy defeat in last summer's Westminster election, with polls suggesting the party's support across Scotland is still 15 points down on its tally in 2021. In the event, the fall in the party's support in Hamilton was, at 17 points, just a little higher than that. However, Labour's own tally was also down by two points on its vote in 2021, when overall the party came a disappointing third. That drop was very much in line with recent polling, which puts the party at just 19 per cent across Scotland as a whole, while the SNP has around a third of the vote. In addition, Labour is losing somewhere between one in six and one in five of its voters to Reform since last year's election. After nearly two decades in the political wilderness, there is little sign that Labour, as it currently stands, is set to regain the reins of power at Holyrood. Alex Orr, Edinburgh Real winner After all the hype by First Minister John Swinney talking up Reform and ignoring Labour it was obviously a tactic by the SNP to try and salvage a win in Hamilton. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Similarly, despite a dreadful campaign by Labour, voting SNP was simply not an option for many on the left. In comes the real winner, Reform UK, with a spectacular vote from a near nil base. Mr Swinney has unleashed a force that will do real damage in the 2026 Holyrood election. The SNP has proved itself too self-congratulatory too many times. Eighteen years of misrule cannot be rewarded by another term in office. All bets are off as to the make-up of Holyrood in 2026. The SNP is tired, Labour has yet to prove itself effective, Reform UK has the bit between its teeth and the Tories might yet recover. A year is a long time in politics. Gerald Edwards, Glasgow Swinney must go The loss of the Hamilton by-election to the risibly inept 'Scottish' Labour – a party so devoid of ideas it could barely muster a coherent manifesto – is not merely a setback. It is a catastrophe of the SNP's own making. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad This was an entirely avoidable humiliation. Instead of seizing the moment – with independence support now at a formidable 54 per cent in a Norstat poll – John Swinney chose to dither. His response? A pledge to wait until 75 per cent of Scots beg for freedom before lifting a finger. When Keir Starmer declared he would block any independence referendum, Swinney's silence was deafening. Not a word of defiance, not a hint of resistance to the colonial farce of Section 30. Instead, he opted to align with Labour – a party whose sole distinction from Reform is a marginally more polished veneer of hypocrisy. Both are unionist to the core, united in their mission to siphon Scotland's wealth southward while offering nothing but condescension in return. The campaign itself was a masterclass in misdirection. Rather than rallying the independence movement with a bold vision, Swinney fixated on Reform – as if thwarting Nigel Farage's band of reactionary clowns was the defining struggle of Scottish nationalism. The result? A muddled, defensive mess that left voters uninspired and Labour undeservedly triumphant. The truth is stark: the SNP has no plan for independence. No strategy beyond grovelling to Westminster for permission to hold a vote – a humiliation masquerading as diplomacy. It is a spectacle so pitiful it verges on self-parody. Swinney must go. Not with a whimper, but with the swift, decisive exit his failures demand. The independence movement deserves leaders who grasp that freedom is seized, not negotiated – and who possess the courage to act accordingly. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Until then, the SNP's decline will continue, and Scotland's potential will remain shackled by the timid and the unimaginative. Alan Hinnrichs, Dundee Let teachers teach As a retired primary teacher who worked for 40 years in primary education, I think there is a simple solution to the 'excessive workload'. Stop expecting detailed forward plans, lesson plans and reviews of the same and let teachers teach instead of being overburdened with paperwork for the sake of accountability. The Curriculum for Excellence has a lot to answer for. It was what changed things so drastically and made teaching so much more stressful. When I began teaching in the 1970s, teachers completed a Record of Work every two weeks. This showed the work that had been completed in all the subjects taught in the primary curriculum in the previous two weeks. From there the progress that was made was clear and any teacher taking over the class (say as sickness cover) knew what was being taught. This was not as detailed as the Forward Plan which replaced it, but it was a clear record, in one slim book, of what had been achieved over the school year. Pupils' work was marked daily and preparations for next day made daily. The pupils left literate and numerate and, for the most part, behaved responsibly. Forty years later we were required to make a 'Forward Plan' for each subject for the term ahead and then assessed as to how we felt it had been achieved before writing the next Forward Plan! A daily diary of the plan for each day was also required. This was to be written up for the week so any teacher could take over. This was detailed to show subject, aims and objectives. On top of this there was, of course, the marking and noting of any problems and collecting materials for the next day's work. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad In the last year or so of my career we had a school inspection. The HMI 'dropped in' to observe one of my lessons and said at the end, 'That was an excellent lesson, but I'm afraid I cannot grade you on it as you didn't have a detailed lesson plan'. My reply was that I had never written a full lesson plan for any lesson since graduating from Callendar Park teacher training college. If teachers are allowed to teach without all the emphasis on accountability their workload would be greatly reduced and they could enjoy working with their pupils and seeing them love to learn, as I did at the start of my career. Barbara Wilson, Edinburgh Cringe no more I must disagree with Alexander McKay, and by extension, Billy Connolly, on the charge that the Scottish Parliament is 'pretendy' (Letters, 6 June). Far from it. Rather, it brings democracy and answerability to our doorstep. If the Scottish Parliament were pretendy, the Westminster Parliament is undoubtedly toxic. Politicians of the calibre of Mhairi Black and Stephen Flynn, disillusioned with Westminster, are seriously thinking of transferring their allegiance. Scotland struggled long and hard to achieve a Scottish Parliament in 1999, with the likes of Donald Dewar, Winnie Ewing, David Steel and Alex Salmond playing leading roles. Hopefully, Holyrood is here to stay, and grow in stature and personnel, with more and Parliamentarians choosing to be MSPs rather than MPs. Let's hear no more of the infamous 'Scottish cringe'. Ian Petrie, Edinburgh On the buses Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Andrew Clark, who expressed absolute dismay over bus lanes (Letters, 5 June), got the wrong end of the stick. Bus priority lanes are not, in the first instance, about reducing pollution, but about minimising congestion for those who are prepared to travel together. And to encourage people to do so, buses need to be able to progress reliably, especially on the main arteries. Cars have a vastly disproportionate footprint compared to buses. Bus lanes go some way towards reallocating the communal road space more fairly. Harald Tobermann, Chair, Edinburgh Bus Users Group Write to The Scotsman
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
All change after Hamilton – but not perhaps in the way you expect
To elect is, literally, to choose. And people in this by-election have chosen, narrowly, to put their faith in Labour's Davy Russell, who fought a doorstep campaign, remote from media concerns. This was the change contest. Understandably pleased, the Prime Minister hailed a 'fantastic victory' for Labour – before adding that 'people in Scotland had once again voted for change.' Read more Brian Taylor I think that is true but I suspect it may not be quite the change advanced by Sir Keir Starmer. I understand his perspective. He is seeking to fit Hamilton into the wider Starmer narrative. You will recall that, at the July UK General Election, Sir Keir repeatedly offered 'change'. His aim was to gain from the discontent – no, the loathing – which had attached itself to the Conservatives. To posit Labour as the remedy, without being all that specific about details. So, with these comments on Hamilton, he is seeking to suggest that Davy Russell's victory is, in some way, continuity: an endorsement of the approach pursued by his government. To repeat, I understand his motivation in so doing. But I am certain that this is awry. You have only to listen to senior figures from Scottish Labour to grasp that Hamilton disquiet was aimed at incumbency. The SNP at Holyrood, yes. But also Labour at Westminster. Broadcasting to an astonished nation on the wireless, I was most struck by Labour MSP Paul Sweeney who disclosed candidly that he had experienced 'pretty grim conversations' with voters. Despite those doorstep difficulties, Labour contrived to oust the defending SNP. Incidentally, only the third time the incumbents have lost in the twelve Holyrood by-elections which have taken place since devolution. But Labour's Scottish leader, Anas Sarwar, knows this fell far short of an enthusiastic vote of confidence. He knows people want much more from Team Starmer. He knows they are upset over the economy and benefit curbs. Still, that Labour victory does represent change. The ousting of the SNP. Which itself demands a further change. John Swinney acknowledged as much at his news conference. His party, he said, had made some progress – but not enough. The aim now must be to address the priorities of the people, specifically the cost of living and NHS waiting times. He was accused by Labour's Anas Sarwar of seeking to drive voters towards Reform UK. Again an understandable point, but not entirely valid. Certainly, Mr Swinney suggested that the by-election was a two-horse race between the SNP and Nigel Farage's party. In so doing, he was seeking to polarise the contest, to pitch his party as the ones to stop the seemingly resurgent Reform, aware that Labour had comfortably outpolled the SNP at the UK election last year. Sir Keir Starmer is keen to tie the by-election into a wider story about Labour (Image: free) It was, in short, a strategy rather than a forecast. Nevertheless, the SNP came up short – and a degree of humility can now be expected from the First Minister. So he too must change the SNP formula. To a substantial degree, he already has, concentrating upon popular priorities such as the NHS, while sidelining issues such as gender. Some within the SNP may question Mr Swinney's own judgement. I suspect, however, that the majority will back his determination to focus firmly upon the economy and public service delivery. If there was even a fragment of complacency in the SNP leadership, it has been utterly expunged by Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse. Might this result also sideline the issue of independence, as the campaign group Scotland in Union suggest? Not in those terms. John Swinney will continue to pitch independence as a solution to persistent problems. But I expect he will primarily concentrate upon the problems themselves. Listening, in short, to voters. That emphasis may further disadvantage the Tories who tend to do well at Holyrood when they can depict themselves as the stalwart defenders of a threatened union. However, there are other changes to consider. Labour's vote is well down on the UK General Election in this area and on their by-election showing in Rutherglen and Hamilton West. Folk are scunnered with the SNP. But they are also unhappy with the PM and the Chancellor, Rachel Reeves. If she doubts that, perhaps she could have a word with her Commons aide, Imogen Walker. The MP for Hamilton and Clyde Valley. So Anas Sarwar will pursue a twin strategy. Gently, diplomatically urging his Westminster colleagues to pursue policies which palpably help voters. While at the same time offering to change the government at Holyrood. Pitching himself as the sole contender to oust Mr Swinney. Seeking to marginalise rivals. Another change is the emergence of Reform. They came a creditable third, consigning the Tories to a whimpering fourth. Indeed, they got a higher percentage in this area than the Tories have historically managed. A sign perhaps that Reform can appeal to a wider range of voters, also eating into Labour and SNP support. Read more But will that endure? Or will Reform fall back again, perhaps beset by the internal divisions which emerged sharply on polling day itself when their chairman, Scots-born Zia Yousuf, resigned? On quitting, he said that he no longer wished to devote his time to installing Nigel Farage in Downing Street. He was also less than delighted with the new Reform MP Sarah Pochin who said in the Commons that the burka should be banned. However, the Tories are not exactly exempt from internal division, at Westminster and Holyrood. They must simply strive to recover from this by-election nadir – and hope that Reform will subside. Does this by-election change expectations of the Holyrood outcome next year? In itself, no. It tells us that voters are scunnered. But then you already knew that. It tells us that folk want and expect change. They want an easing of this age of anxiety. But then you knew that too. Brian Taylor is a former political editor for BBC Scotland and a columnist for The Herald. He cherishes his family, the theatre - and Dundee United FC
Glasgow Times
an hour ago
- Glasgow Times
Holidaymakers warned ahead of summer strike action at Glasgow Airport
Unite the union said workers at Glasgow Airport, ICTS Central Search, Swissport, Menzies Aviation and Falck could be balloted for walkouts. The union said on Saturday that if there is no successful resolution to the disputes in the coming days, it will move towards holding votes on industrial action within two weeks. It warned strikes could 'ground planes and passengers'. READ NEXT: Scotland's largest teaching union launch consultative ballot for strike action (Image: Image of Glasgow Airport) Pat McIlvogue, Unite industrial officer, said walkouts could be held from the middle of July. More than 100 Swissport workers are locked in a dispute about rotas and work-life balance, according to Unite. It said the company 'is demanding that workers at extreme short notice have to work shifts at various times and for various durations, which is directly impacting on their personal lives'. Unite said some Swissport staff are 'struggling with chronic fatigue'. A further 250 ICTS Central Search workers, who deal with passengers directly in the security search area and process them for flights, are currently involved in a dispute over under-staffing, working conditions and pay. A total of 120 workers employed by Glasgow Airport Limited have rejected a basic 3.6% pay increase, with staff including airport ambassadors, airside support officers, engineers and managers involved. The same 3.6% pay increase was rejected by 50 Falck firefighters who perform fire safety functions at the airport. Meanwhile 300 Menzies Aviation workers, including dispatchers, allocators, airside agents and controllers, have rejected a basic uplift worth around 4.25%. READ NEXT: Global lifestyle brand to open first-ever store in Glasgow The union recently announced a series of what it said were wage wins for 100 North Air workers across Scottish airports, and more than 140 staff based at Glasgow Airport employed by ABM and OCS. Unite general secretary Sharon Graham said: 'Hundreds of workers at Glasgow Airport are heading towards summer strike action which would ground planes and passengers. 'The companies involved are all highly profitable and can easily afford to give our members better pay and working conditions. 'The truth is that they are denying fair pay increases to cynically boost their profits.' Mr McIlvogue said: 'Unite is in dispute with companies at Glasgow Airport which could ultimately bring hundreds of workers out on strike. 'The companies can resolve these disputes with Unite before that situation happens by addressing the legitimate concerns and pay aspirations of our members. 'If the companies refuse to work with Unite to resolve these disputes, then we will have no option but to open strike ballots. This could mean strike action happening from the middle of July.' A spokesperson for Swissport said: 'We are in dialogue with Unite – the talks so far have been constructive and we remain focused on working together to address the issues being raised.' Glasgow Airport Ltd, ICTS Central Search, Menzies Aviation and Falck have been contacted for comment.
