As the debate about unitary authorities continues, council officers and members in England may look north of the border with some envy at the fact that Scottish councils have been spared the threat of any further reorganisation. After the new Scottish National Party-led Holyrood Government came to power in 2007, finance secretary, John Swinney, made it plain there would be no further upheaval affecting local government. He believed councils would be able to concentrate more on the issues affecting local communities if they were spared the ‘distraction' of fundamental boundary changes. That makes sense. Scottish councils were also offered – and accepted – a deal which is probably unprecedented in recent history. The concordat struck between ministers and leaders of the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities (COSLA) recognised the right of councils to have a role in the governance of Scotland. The concordat swept away many controls and resulted in the formulation of new single outcome agreements. One of its aims was to develop a positive relationship which would encourage councils and the Scottish Government to work together. As in all such deals, there is a price to pay. As part of the concordat, council leaders had to sign up to government policies. Some critics of the arrangement saw this as eroding the right of councils to make their own decisions. But, as Rory Mair, chief executive of COSLA points out, the concordat has brought advantages. ‘Whether or not they agree with the Government, politicians now feel they are involved in the governance of Scotland.' The latest suggestion to emerge from the Scottish Government is its intention to seek discussions on writing a new constitution enshrining the role of councils. If that happens, then it could prevent ministers from abolishing councils in the way Margaret Thatcher scrapped Greater London Council.
