The independent, non-party think tank Enlighten has published a paper written by Keith Yates, former Chief Executive of Stirling Council, and a number of other former local authority chief executives, which calls for “a new democratic settlement” devolving power from the Scottish Government to local authorities.
The former chief executives are part of the Mercat Group, an informal, non-political network of former Chief Executives of Scottish Councils, which offers considered, evidence-based insights to stimulate debate and promote the revitalisation of local democracy.
In a new paper – Revitalising Local Democracy in Scotland – written by the Mercat Group and published by Enlighten, Keith Yates and his fellow former chief executives highlight that:
- Since the highwater mark of local democracy after the Wheatley reforms of 1975, there has been a hollowing out of local democracy. This followed the creation of unitary authorities in 1996, and then the opening of the Scottish Parliament in 1999, resulting in the centralisation of services, with over 100 quangos responsible for the delivery and inspection of public services.
- Place management has become increasingly complex. The pace of change and growth has slowed due to austerity and the cluttered landscape of new bodies and agencies whose priorities often clash with those of elected councils.
- Scotland has become one of the most centralised democracies, with councils and communities becoming less involved in shaping their futures as more decisions are taken centrally.
- The Scottish Parliament is perceived by many as too tribal and failing to evolve through collaboration and constructive dialogue
The Mercat Group is now calling for a ‘New Democratic Settlement’ after the 2026 Scottish Parliament election, aimed at devolving public services to the authorities closest to the citizen, and at embedding local government in a written constitution for Scotland.
The full paper can be read here.
Keith Yates said:
“There is a broad consensus that local democracy in Scotland is much diminished from the crucial part it played in the development of the nation in the 19th and 20th centuries. Most of the life-changing innovations for people and places were designed and built by our municipalities, and Scotland flourished not from government initiatives but from the wellspring of local practical experience.
“Centralisation has brought with it diminished trust. In 1999, trust in the Scottish Parliament stood at 81%; this had dropped to 47% in the 2023 Scottish Social Attitude Survey. The latest Scottish Household Survey found that trust in local councils had declined to 53%. It is surely time for Scotland to think again.
“We are suggesting a dozen issues that the Scottish Parliament might address to accelerate growth, improve public services and increase citizen participation.”
The Mercat Group’s suggestions include:
- Completing the devolution settlement by embedding local government in a written constitution
- Reinvigorating local communities by triggering the latent energy and commitment of communities, and
- Asking whether Scotland has become too Edicentric since the siting of the Scottish Parliament in Edinburgh. It has accelerated its development as the political, financial, cultural, transport and media hub of Scotland. Edinburgh dominance may have restricted growth elsewhere: “the A9 isn’t the only project on hold as Edinburgh blossoms”
Chris Deerin, Director of Enlighten, said:
“Scottish local government is not in a healthy state. Powers have been centralised to Holyrood, budgets are inadequate, and opinion polls show that trust in local democracy is in decline.
“Scottish local government is not in a healthy state. Powers have been centralised to Holyrood, budgets are inadequate, and opinion polls show that trust in local democracy is in decline.
“The suggestions in this paper, from former chief executives who understand this deeply, should be carefully considered by the political parties as they prepare their manifestos. This cannot be yet another missed opportunity for meaningful reform.”
3 comments
Ian Davidson
An interesting paper which deserves a second read. The political landscape has changed dramatically since 1975/Wheatley?
Cosla does itself no favours with “own goals” such as the Chief Exec pay rises which, politically, will benefit Reform?
On a personal note, I used to work for Keith Yates at SRC. Sadly, the urban deprivation issues of Renfrewshire & Inverclyde (the areas which I covered) seem no better now than in the 80s in spite of the Urban Programme and other investment? The Regions were sacrificed to make way for devolution (and other political reasons) but Regional Planning and resource sharing was lost in the 1996 changes. In Glasgow, 1997 was a brutal year for Social Services and other community services, from which it has not fully recovered?
I agree that if Councils are to be freed from Holyrood fiefdom, then that greater trust + flexibility must extend to local communities.
Holyrood has been a disappointment in many respects. However, “reform” rather than Reform’s quest to abolish, is the way forward? Roll on 2026 Elections!
Angus Tulloch
As with the Scottish Parliament, the public would be much happier giving more power to local councils if the latter could provide evidence that they used what powers they have effectively, and were themselves prepared to devolve powers where applicable.
Education is the classic example where the evidence very much suggests the opposite to be the case. Councils have almost unrestricted powers here but seem very unwilling themselves to innovate, or to allow head teachers to do so. It is surely more than coincidence that Jordanhill in Glasgow has been consistently rated as the best performing state secondary school in Scotland, but is one of the very few schools not controlled by its local authority.
I like the idea of compulsory voting though as long as a ‘none of the above’ box included on voting slips.
Neil Gilmour
There’s much to like about the paper. The diagnosis of the current state of play is balanced and in “Some Notions for Political Collaboration and Action”, the ideas are clearly laid out and would likely improve delivery and democratic accountability.
There are other alternatives to yet another reorganisation, yet more “refocus and declutter”, yet more reworking of democratisation proposals from over a decade ago. At the core of the democratic crisis in Britain, in Scotland and locally is the near-complete disenfranchisement of the citizen and the local community. We are ignored, bullied, shut out and patronised in the main. Secrecy surrounds process and covers up inefficiency and incompetence. Cross-party collaboration is the exception not any sort of norm. Intra-council fighting blights quality decision-making, while internal process slows and strangles innovation. There are few practices worth replicating or sharing more widely, In response many local communities increasingly wish to “do it ourselves”. This means exerting direct influence over multi-year budgets, co-owning assets, being in the driving seat on decisions, and having longer-term mutually respectful relationships with our representatives. This is the successful norm in many European countries where communities own energy infrastructure (Spain), run their green spaces (The Netherlands) and vote on big infrastructure/planning decisions (various).
Our current culture with endless meaningless and profoundly cynical “consultation” exercises, planning processes that marginalise and disenfranchise local residents and poorly implemented/low value for money “big infrastructure” won’t be transformed by the The Mercat proposal.
Who wouldn’t like much better local and central Government? But who would we actually trust most to exercise profound change and get all Scots back onside?