|
UNISONScotland Response to
Scottish Executive document
Making a Difference for Scotland
(includes draft budget and spending plans for
2001-02 to 2003-04)
Background
This paper constitutes a response from UNISON Scotland to the Scottish
Executive document Making a Difference for Scotland which includes
the draft budget and spending plans for 2001-02 to 2003-04. This
paper builds on our response to the Stage 1 consultation included
in the Annual Expenditure Report.
UNISON is Scotland’s largest trade union and represents staff
in almost all of the areas highlighted in the spending plans.
Introduction
UNISON was critical of the superficial nature of last years budget
process although recognising that it was a new and welcome attempt
to provide a more transparent and accountable system..
In the Stage 1 paper this year the financial plans went down to
Level 3 and included some helpful commentary and performance indicators.
Whilst we welcomed this as a significant improvement on last year
we argued that Level 3 still only provides a superficial view of
the major spending departments. We also argued that the presentation
of figures in the Stage1 document could be improved. In particular
changes in budget lines from last year make comparisons difficult
and the presentation of capital and revenue expenditure (including
PFI costs) are unclear. Other policy objectives (e.g. community
care) are split into several headings making it difficult to see
the total picture.
When considering Making a Difference for Scotland we are left with
the impression that the Executive is now making the position worse
rather than better. This document does not even include the level
of detail provided in the Stage 1 document. We appear to have returned
to broad headings and text which cannot be traced back to hard figures.
In these circumstances it is almost impossible to comment sensibly
on the draft budget. In the spirit of openness which should be the
hallmark of the Scottish Parliament we would still press for the
full budget to be published as a separate document.
We remain concerned over the growth of budgets under the direct
control of ministers at the expense of those administered by other
bodies who are also under democratic scrutiny. In addition there
is a growth in hypothecated allocations which undermines local democratically
accountable organisations.
UNISON Scotland broadly welcomes the real term increase in the
Scottish Executive budget including the additional resources set
out by the Chancellor in the UK Government’s spending review.
However, we need to recognise that the damage to Scotland’s
public services from years of underfunding will take significant
resources over and above those available in these spending plans.
Health
UNISON welcomes the significant real term increase in health spending
as a modest start in addressing the urgent need to rebuild the NHS
in Scotland. However, due to the absence of detailed figures it
is unclear how much of these additional resources will go into in
Hospital and Community Health Services, which as all the recent
indicators show are under severe pressure.
Most of the additional resources appear to be allocated to specific
initiatives which means that Trusts and Health Boards are not funded
to deal with financial pressures outwith these targetted areas.
For example the cost of pay awards (Junior Doctors pay in particular),
the implementation of the Working Time Regulations and new drug
costs have not been fully funded. This also has to be put in the
context of the debt crisis which exist in many Trusts.
UNISON recognises the absence of proper accountability within the
current structures and welcomes the recent announcement by the Health
Minister on this issue as a first step towards rebuilding a truly
Scottish health service. In the context of the present structures
it is therefore understandable that the Minister wishes to ensure
that new resources are allocated to agreed priorities. However,
if the core service remains underfunded staff and patients will
not see the additional resources benefiting their immediate environment
and therefore the new funding announcements lose credibility. In
addition repeated spending announcements do not assist credibility.
The drive for more efficient and effective services continues to
be undermined by wasting resources
through the inefficient use of the Private Finance Initiative.
Children and Education
UNISON Scotland welcomes the significant real term increase in
mainly small centrally funded initiatives and services, recognising
that the bulk of spending in this area is in the Local Government
and Health budgets.
Whilst we support many of these initiatives, we remain concerned
that significant real term budget increases are being built into
directly controlled budgets primarily at the expense of local government.
Schools are another area where resources are being wasted through
the use of PFI despite the attempts by several local authorities
to hide the true cost from the public..
Enterprise and Life Long Learning
The significant increase in Higher and Further education spending
is welcomed, rectifying last year’s real term cut in HE spending,
although the lack of detail makes it unclear how much of this is
going to fund student support.
We were critical of the proposed cuts in the funding of the Careers
Service in the Stage 1 proposals. The new proposals with their additional
resources for this important service is therefore very welcome.
Communities
We note the further increase in resources allocated to Community
Ownership (was New Housing Partnerships) again presumably at the
expense of other local government funding. A change of name will
not make this inefficient use of resources any more acceptable.
UNISON welcomes further increased spending under the Warm Deal
and the recently announced central heating and insulation scheme.
This is a welcome move towards a comprehensive strategy to address
fuel poverty as recommended in the UNISON supported Keeping Scotland
Warm strategy.
The further increase in Social Inclusion Funding is also welcome
although greater detail is needed. However, again we are concerned
that this funding is at the expenses of direct local government
funding. We were critical of the proposed reduction in funding for
the voluntary sector and equalities and therefore welcome the revised
budget and the increased resources.
Environment
UNISON Scotland does not support the further real term cuts in
revenue support to Scottish Water Authorities. These cuts are a
partial explanation for the higher than necessary increase in water
charges along with the wasteful use of PFI. It is entirely unclear
how the Executive can claim “We have made additional resources
available …”. As we indicated in our response to Managing
Change in the Water Industry there is an urgent need to cancel debt
and provide a level playing field in the Scottish water industry.
We welcome the increased Environmental Protection budget which
is a significant improvement on the Stage 1 proposals. However,
much of these resources will be allocated to new responsibilities
given to SEPA (including the Flood Warning System) and has to be
seen in the context of inadequate funding over recent years. The
proposed standstill budget for 2002-04 will make it very difficult
for SEPA to meet these new demands and we will wish to revisit this
issue next year.
(UNISON Scotland Water
Industry Links Page)
Transport
We note the significant real term increase in funding for motorways
and trunk roads and remain to be convinced that this is the best
use of resources in this budget. We are particularly concerned over
the further cut in grant to local authorities and the projected
further cuts up to 2003-04. Switching resources from rail to road
does not accord with our understanding of the Scottish Executive’s
transport policy. The text makes several references to targets in
this area of transport policy. However, the usual absence of financial
data does not give us confidence that these targets will be supported
financially.
The lack of detail also makes it difficult to assess other areas
of transport including the routing of DETR funding for British Waterways
(Scotland) through the Scottish Executive.
European Funds
The absence of any detail in this section makes it difficult to
assess the impact these funds have on Scotland’s public services
and in particular how they impact on other budget heads. This lack
of transparency only fuels suspicion that Scotland is not getting
full value from this funding system.
Local Government
UNISON Scotland gives a qualified welcome to the real term increase
in local authority revenue expenditure and the claimed provision
for general increases in pay and prices which have not been covered
in recent years. Recognising that there remains the issue of the
distribution formula to be resolved.
However, this increase has to be seen in the context of major cuts
since reorganisation in 1996-97. Local governments share of the
Scottish Block grant has declined from 40% to 36% over this period
resulting in some 13,000 job losses. Elements of the additional
funding have been hypothecated and local authorities face additional
financial commitments over and above inflation e.g McCrone.
Whilst the recognition of the need to fund pay for future years
is welcome it does nothing to address the current pay difficulties
which reflect many years of underfunding. In addition there is no
indication of the assumptions upon which this funding is based.
UNISON Scotland believes that there is an urgent need to review
local government finance. In particular the allocation of business
rate revenue discriminates against urban areas which generate most
revenue but do not see an equitable share of resources. For example,
Glasgow collects £264m in business rates yet only receives
£201m back under the current arrangements. Whilst UNISON welcomes
many aspects of the recent announcements on local government finance
including the abolition of expenditure guidelines and the three
year grant settlement, the review should consider further relaxation
in the controls placed on local authorities.
Justice
After last year’s significant cuts a real term increase in
expenditure is welcome. However, as with other budgets the absence
of detail makes it difficult to assess the benefits to particular
services.
CONCLUSION
UNISON Scotland broadly welcomes the real term increase in expenditure
across most budget headings. We also welcome the fact that this
plan shows some signs that the Executive has listened to the representations
made by UNISON and others. However, broad budget headings disguise
very real problems with a number of services which are unlikely
to be fully addressed within these spending plans.
The most disappointing aspect of the plans is yet again in the
presentation. Heavy on spin and short on detail is the overwhelming
response of UNISON members when they commented on these plans. As
we indicated last year, the very real achievements of the Scottish
Executive are at risk of being lost under a tide of cynicism caused
by poor and in some cases misleading presentation. All that is required
in this process is the publication of the full budget, presented
in a consistent format. We strongly urge that approach on the Scottish
Executive.
Dave Watson
UNISON Scotland
Public Finances Policy Pool
November 2000
Submissions
index | Home
|
Scotland's
public service union
|
