Minister announces £1bn in savings to be redirected to frontline services
The Scottish Government has launched a brand new public service reform strategy to make £1bn of savings in the next five years.
Ivan McKee set out a range of reforms to Scotland's public sector on Thursday as he aims to make it efficient and fit for the future.
He said spending from 'back office costs' will be cut by 20%, with the cash being redirected to frontline services.
By 2029-30, the Government estimates this will amount to £1bn a year in savings, freeing up cash in areas such as the NHS.
'This will require every part of the public sector to reduce the cost of doing business to prioritise the frontline,' McKee said.
'The aim is to do things better, not do less.'
McKee said the Scottish Government will achieve the savings through a combination of automation, digitisation, estate rationalisation, and workforce reform.
Among the 80 actions set out in Mr McKee's reforms include changes to the culture of the public sector and those in charge of it.
The number of public bodies will be reduced to drive a more efficient system alongside a new review of public sector buildings.
The minister said the Government will embrace automation and new technology to digitise government.
The Scottish Trades Union Congress (STUC) criticised the strategy of 'missing the mark'.
'Whenever government ministers speak of public sector 'efficiencies', workers anxiously hold their breath,' said STUC general secretary Roz Foyer.
'These cuts, prepacked as reforms, miss the mark entirely. Simply put: you can't fix public services by cutting the very people who keep them running. Talk of reducing headcount while NHS waiting times spiral, A&E departments are overwhelmed and social care is in crisis is as reckless as it is illogical.'
She said Scotland deserves public services that are properly funded, and 'not an overreliance on technology to plug staffing shortages'.
'The reality is that Scotland's fiscal future demands honesty and ambition. Instead of chasing cuts disguised as reform, ministers should be adopting progressive tax policies that can raise the revenue we need,' Ms Foyer said.
'Before racing ahead with changes, the Scottish Government must engage in serious dialogue with the trade union movement. We've been clear: we will not support any programme that threatens jobs, conditions or the quality of the services our communities rely on. That position remains the same.'
The Tory shadow secretary for finance slammed the reforms as a 'wish-list of word soup that fails to mention waste once'.
'Despite the SNP saying we were reckless for proposing fully costed tax cuts worth £500m, they now claim they can save £1bn by merely slashing corporate functions,' MSP Craig Hoy said.
'There is still an astonishing lack of detail as to where these savings will be made, or what quangos will be axed. The public simply will not trust the SNP to suddenly tackle the enormous waste they have presided over.'
Daniel Johnson, Scottish Labour's finance spokesman, said he welcomed the 'overall sentiment' but feared it amounted to 'a plan for a plan'.
He said Thursday's statement was 'an acknowledgement that we have a billion pounds worth of waste'.
He added: 'Reform, to my mind, is not about shrinking the state, but maximising its effectiveness and you cannot ignore the fact that over the past decade, the civil service has grown at three times the rate of the NHS, while police, fire and colleges' headcounts have all fallen.'
Get all the latest news from around the country Follow STV News
Scan the QR code on your mobile device for all the latest news from around the country
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
37 minutes ago
- BBC News
Shropshire's Nesscliffe army site still housing Afghan families
An army camp that was adapted as a short-term home for Afghan families, who escaped the Taliban in 2023, is still being used, it has to 200 families and individuals moved to the base at Nesscliffe in Shropshire in 2023, under the Government's Afghan resettlement was designed to help those who'd assisted the UK mission in Afghanistan and Shropshire Council said in November 2023 they were only expected to stay for six authority said there have been no arrivals since Feb 2025 and attempts to find suitable homes for six remaining families were continuing. When the families moved in, people living in the area had raised concerns about people walking on the narrow lanes around Nesscliffe and about the lack of facilities. Local residents thanked When approached again by the BBC, the council said "no end date was confirmed, only that the site was to be used temporally, as needed".After the last families leave, it will be returned to Ministry of Defence (MoD) use. The council has confirmed the camp had been funded by the government and the authority has not received any money to use the MoD said the UK had "a moral obligation to resettle Afghans eligible under the Afghan Resettlement Programme" to get them "away from the threat of the Taliban".It said Nesscliffe was "an important staging post for Afghans when they first arrive in the UK" and thanked local residents for helping the families "feel welcome, valued, and part of the community"."It is clear that the Defence Estate is not the long-term solution to housing requirements for all Afghan resettlement schemes," the MoD confirmed. Follow BBC Shropshire on BBC Sounds, Facebook, X and Instagram.
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
The nine reasons why MPs might reject assisted dying bill
On Friday, MPs will vote on whether the controversial assisted dying bill brought by Labour MP Kim Leadbeater should become law. The outcome is too close to call. The slim 55-vote majority Ms Leadbeater secured at the bill's Second Reading is narrowing by the hour. A growing number of MPs who previously backed it or abstained last November are now coming out against it. With the clock ticking, The Telegraph sets out nine serious flaws in the legislation that remain unresolved. Critics of Ms Leadbeater's bill hope these unaddressed issues will be enough to persuade wavering MPs to oppose the bill, shifting the balance and stopping the law change in its tracks. 1. People with anorexia could qualify Doctors and lawyers have warned that the bill leaves the door open for patients with severe eating disorders to access assisted dying. If their condition is deemed terminal and they are judged to have mental capacity, they could qualify. In a significant intervention on Wednesday, Dr Annabel Price, lead for assisted dying at the Royal College of Psychiatrists, warned: 'We are particularly concerned about the possible inclusion of people whose mental disorders have physical impacts that can lead to death, such as kidney failure from anorexia. 'We have seen people with eating disorders be considered terminally ill and therefore eligible for assisted dying/assisted suicide in other countries.' 2. Financial strain on the NHS A government impact assessment last month estimated that setting up and running the service could cost up to £13.6 million a year. Critics argue that while some savings may come from reduced treatment and care, these are finite, while the cost of running the scheme is not. Civil servants were unable to put a total figure on costs because the draft legislation contains no plan for how the service will be run. On Tuesday, Dame Siobhain McDonagh warned the bill could 'rob our stretched NHS of much-needed resources', urging Labour MPs to vote against it. Wes Streeting, the Health Secretary, also confirmed there was 'no money allocated' for the service. 3. Sign-off inadequate Final approval by a High Court judge, a key safeguard previously cited by dozens of MPs at the last major Parliamentary vote, has been removed from the bill. Instead, final approval will be taken by three-member panels of a lawyer, psychiatrist and social worker. Sir James Munby, former head of the Family Division of the High Court, said he remained 'deeply troubled' by the lack of rigour these panels would afford. Proposals to ensure these panels were independently appointed and had further investigative powers were not selected by the Speaker and cannot now be reinstated before the vote. 4. Not enough psychiatrists The Royal College of Psychiatrists has warned there are not enough specialists to meet current demand, let alone the new requirement for every sign-off panel to have a psychiatrist on it. Dr Price said: 'There is a practical issue of not having enough psychiatrists to meet current and escalating demand. Even now, we simply do not have the resource to be able to give each person the careful attention they deserve.' 5. Oversight issues Ms Leadbeater's bill includes the option for doctors who carry out the initial assessments for an assisted death to refer to a psychiatrist for further review. However, in most cases, the first time that a psychiatrist will be involved in assessing an application, will be when it gets sent to the three-member panel for final sign-off. Ms Leadbeater claims the inclusion of psychiatrists on panels, which would be expected to process two cases a day, ensures proper oversight. But the royal college disagrees. Dr Price said the bill gives psychiatrists too little time and space for a full assessment and reduces them to rubber-stamping decisions made by others. She said: 'The idea that we could be involved on a panel only to check decisions made by others, rather than to conduct the full evaluations we are trained to do, is deeply troubling. A psychiatrist's role should be to ascertain whether a mental disorder is influencing a person's wish to die, and to offer treatment when this is the case.' 6. Hospices risk losing funding While Ms Leadbeater conceded an amendment allowing individual staff from care homes and hospices to opt out from any involvement in administering assisted deaths, a wider amendment protecting hospices and care homes from being forced to participate was not selected for separate decision on Friday. It comes after MPs have already rejected a proposal by Rachael Maskell that would have meant care homes and hospices were not obligated to participate. As a result, hospices could face pressure to comply or risk losing funding. 7. Private companies could profit The bill does not prevent private companies from offering assisted dying services or profiting from them. Danny Kruger MP said this created scope for private providers to run the process from referral to death. In response, Labour's Lewis Atkinson said it would be 'inconceivable' that the Health Secretary would commission services in this way and accused him of 'scaremongering'. However, an amendment to ban for-profit provision was not selected, meaning MPs must vote on a bill with no restrictions in place. 8. Mental capacity concerns The bill relies on the Mental Capacity Act test, meaning doctors or panels need only be 'satisfied' on the balance of probabilities that a patient is acting voluntarily and meets the criteria before approving an assisted death request. Amendments to raise the threshold to 'beyond reasonable doubt' were rejected, despite critics of the bill, including Daniel Francis MP, whose daughter has a learning disability, warning that patients were vulnerable to errors or subtle coercion. 9. Auto-commencement clause Despite major outstanding concerns over training, infrastructure and NHS readiness, the bill includes an auto-commencement clause forcing it to come into effect in October 2029, four years after it would become law. This deadline stands regardless of whether the necessary work has been completed or whether the NHS and palliative care sector were prepared, raising the prospect of a legally operational service without proper safeguards.
Scotsman
an hour ago
- Scotsman
Holyrood body admits causing 'upset' amid calls to U-turn on its trans toilet policy
This comes as pressure grows for the Scottish Government to update its official guidance on single-sex spaces. Sign up to our Politics newsletter 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... A Holyrood body admits people will be 'upset' and 'anxious' about its ban on trans women using the parliament's female toilets. Last month the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body (SPCB) ruled that single-sex spaces such as toilets and changing rooms must be interpreted by biological sex only, meaning trans people would not be allowed to use the facilities of their acquired gender. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad This comes after the UK Supreme Court ruled that the terms 'woman' and 'sex' in the Equality Act 2010 refers to biological sex. The Scottish Parliament. Scottish Green co-leader Patrick Harvie has now called for the SPCB to rescind this decision. He said: 'In previous discussions in this chamber and in a letter to me, the SPCB says it remains committed to an inclusive environment and its intention is that everyone should feel welcome and included in Holyrood. 'But this demonstrates the opposite - this makes trans people feel significantly less welcome at parliament. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad 'The decision is described as one that brings confidence and dignity to everyone, but it will exclude and segregate trans people in the heart of Scotland's democracy.' He added the toilet ban is already having a 'negative impact' on trans and gender non-conforming members of staff. Mr Harvie added: 'Surely it is time for the SPCB to think again and rescind this unclear, unfair position?' Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Jackson Carlaw MSP, who was speaking on behalf of the SPCB, said the body cannot debate the rights and wrongs of the Supreme Court judgement. He said: 'It is our job to ensure we are implementing the law as communicated to us. 'Let me acknowledge on behalf of the body that for some this has proved upsetting and has caused anxiety.' Mr Carlaw added: 'It is our responsibility as a service provider and employer to recognise the judgement had immediate legal effect. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad 'We took urgent steps to review this for facilities in Holyrood in line with the Equality and Human Rights Commission statement on the Equality Act 2010 and our need to comply with it.' Jackson Carlaw MSP. Pam Gosal MSP warned the parliament would have risked using taxpayers' cash to foot expensive legal bills if it had not made this decision. She said: 'Let's be clear, we are talking about the UK Supreme Court. 'The law is the law, and nobody is above it.' The Scottish Government has come under increasing pressure to update its guidance to public bodies on single-sex spaces following the court judgement. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Earlier this week the campaign group Sex Matters sent a legal letter to Scottish ministers threatening to take them back to court if it does not update its guidance. The government says it is waiting for official guidance from the Equality and Human Rights Commission before updating its guidance. Earlier this week Education Secretary Jenny Gilruth also said she was not concerned about schools having to make their own decisions on single-sex spaces.
