Accounts Commission report reveals fantasy of council goals - John McLellan

Housing is by far the largest source of carbon emissions coming from buildings in a city dominated by pre-war homes

So too has the Accounts Commission praised the City of Edinburgh Council for setting clear goals: to create good places to live and work, end poverty in Edinburgh and to become a net zero city by 2030.

I would argue the first is far from clear, because defining something as vague and subjective as “good” is virtually impossible, but the other two are definite. No-one will be poor and net zero will be reached in six years, if the council does what it says it should.

There is, however, as much chance of achieving either as Boris being crowned in St Peter’s in Rome, and without spelling it out, the Accounts Commission report exposes the fantasy of these goals.

The dreadful financial background is beyond question, with the council facing a £30 million budget gap next year, increasing to £109 million by 2028-29, and so far without a detailed plan for achieving such significant reductions.

But the real fantasy is in the Accounts Commission’s advice that councillors “will need to work constructively together to reach agreement on options for reform” because of the “fine balance of political power” in which a small Labour group in administration gets by with day-to-day support from the Lib Dems and Conservatives.

Maybe things have calmed down with the change of leadership in the SNP group, but the levels of vitriol knew no bounds after Labour ended the coalition with the Nationalists which ran the administration from 2012 to the 2022 election, and the repercussions are still being felt behind the scenes to an extraordinary degree.

But whether the groups cooperate is in many ways beside the point because the actions necessary to achieve the goals are largely beyond the council’s control and were when they were set.

Ending destitution is one thing, but relative poverty is the target in which no household has less than 60 per cent of the median income. With an estimated 17 per cent of Edinburgh people in this position, it would either require a vast handout or the forced displacement of the highest earners. Put another way, impossible.

In fact, the goal is not to end it at all, but to reduce it to ten per cent, and even that’s unachievable without reducing the cost of housing. And that’s also impossible without a massive increase in supply, something pointed out when the campaign was launched four years ago.

Yet in the annual End Poverty in Edinburgh progress report, housing is only mentioned in two out of 23 actions from the past year and does not feature at all in the five work-streams for the next 12 months. All they will do is tinker round the edges.

Housing is also key to the net zero strategy, with by far the largest source of carbon emissions coming from buildings in a city dominated by pre-war homes for which there is neither the money nor resources to make the target remotely reachable.

The Accounts Commission’s final observation perhaps sums up the problem, calling for reports to “clearly and easily highlight where under-performance or weaknesses exist” to which it could have added “and not just when there is no other option”.