Argyll and Bute Council's budget simulator

£0

• Funding generated would continue at the same level.

£0

• The annual charge for a Band D property would increase by £44, equivalent to an extra 85p per week.
• This increases the amount of funding available to the Council to deliver vital services to the Community and therefore reduces the level of savings required to balance the budget.

£0

• The annual charge for a Band D property would increase by £74, equivalent to an extra £1.42 per week.
• This increases the amount of funding available to the Council to deliver vital services to the Community and therefore reduces the level of savings required to balance the budget.

£0

• The annual charge for a Band D property would increase by £104, equivalent to an extra £1.99 per week.
• This increases the amount of funding available to the Council to deliver vital services to the Community and therefore reduces the level of savings required to balance the budget.

£0

• The annual charge for a Band D property would increase by £148, equivalent to an extra £2.84 per week.
• This increases the amount of funding available to the Council to deliver vital services to the Community and therefore reduces the level of savings required to balance the budget.

£0

• Funding generated would be maintained at current level.

£0

• This increases the amount of funding available to the Council to deliver vital services to the community and therefore reduces the level of savings required to balance the budget.

£0

• This increases the amount of funding available to the Council to deliver vital services to the community and therefore reduces the level of savings required to balance the budget.

£0

• This increases the amount of funding available to the Council to deliver vital services to the community and therefore reduces the level of savings required to balance the budget.

£0

• This increases the amount of funding available to the Council to deliver vital services to the community and therefore reduces the level of savings required to balance the budget.

£0

• Funding generated would be maintained at current level.

£0

• This increases the amount of funding available to the Council to deliver vital services to the Community and therefore reduces the level of savings required to balance the budget.

£0

• This increases the amount of funding available to the Council to deliver vital services to the Community and therefore reduces the level of savings required to balance the budget.

£0

• This increases the amount of funding available to the Council to deliver vital services to the Community and therefore reduces the level of savings required to balance the budget.

£0

• This increases the amount of funding available to the Council to deliver vital services to the Community and therefore reduces the level of savings required to balance the budget.

£0

• Council would be in breach of statutory duties as we would provide no school meals to schools or care homes.
• No cleaning provided in any schools, buildings or care homes.

£0

• Significant risk of failure to provide statutory duties across the services.
• Significant drop in school meals uptake.
• Only basic food provided to children and young people.
• Option to increase the charge to parents of a school meal to ensure full cost recovery.
• Low infection control with cleaning in schools and offices reduced only to toilet cleaning.
• Redundancy risk for a very large number of posts.

£0

• School meal and food choices further reduced with a reliance on frozen, pre-prepared meals.
• Further risk of drop in number of pupils choosing school meals.
• Statutory obligations around school food and care home meals not guaranteed to be met.
• May have to increase the charge to parents of a school meal to ensure full cost recovery.
• Increasingly likely infection control failures in schools.
• Redundancy risk for increased number of posts.   

£0

• School meal and food choices for pupils further reduced with risk of fewer pupils choosing school meals.
• Stop providing meals to all partner early years' settings.
• More difficult to meet the statutory obligations for meals’ nutritional compliance.  
• Risk of service failure in school meals and care home catering.
• Significantly increased risk of infection control failures in schools .
• Redundancy risk for a significant number of posts.  

£0

• School meal and food choices for pupils will be reduced, with less local, sustainable food served to pupils, no milk at lunchtime, no salad bars and fruit and veg choices removed.
• Risk of drop in pupil numbers choosing school meals.  
• More difficult to meet statutory obligations around school food and care home meals.
• Increased risk of infection control failures in schools.
• Redundancy risk for a significant number of posts.

£0

• School meal and food choices will continue to be provided to pupils, with a focus on increasing and sustaining uptake levels.
• Given food cost inflation a 0% budget would mean a reduction in real terms therefore food cost savings would be needed.
• Cleaning services in schools and public buildings would continue to basic health and safety and infection control standards.

£0

• School meal and food choices for pupils will continue.
• Potential to increase pupils in schools and children in early years taking a school meal.
• Cleaning services in schools and public buildings would continue to ensure that basic health and safety and infection control standards are in place.

£0

• The council would not be able to meet its statutory duty.
• Residual services would return to Council and liveArgyll would cease to operate.
• Redundancy obligation placed on Council.
• Catastrophic impact on local Health and Wellbeing and wider community social value contribution.

£0

• Withdrawal from Active Schools Partnership agreement and associated service provision.
• Unable to safely operate assets and provide a viable service offering i.e. Leisure Centres.
• liveArgyll as an arms-length organisation would be unable to meet service specification requirements and would likely cease operation, however Council statutory obligations would remain.
• Significant impact on Health and Wellbeing agenda.
• Redundancy obligations placed on Council as 100% shareholder.
• Major impact on local Health and Wellbeing and wider community social value contribution.

£0

• Potential risk to fulfilment of statutory obligation to provide adequate library service and Community learning obligations.
• Targeted closure of community centre and hall venues.
• Potential inequity in provision of services across geographical boundaries.
• Significant impact on local Health and Wellbeing and wider community social value contribution.

£0

• Library and Community Learning Services would be reduced resulting in closure of some facilities.
• Halls and Community Centres would not be readily available to members of the public.
• Potential inequity in provision of services across geographical boundaries.

£0

• A reduction at this level will result in a reduced service offering specifically within the non- income generating services of liveArgyll.
• Library, Museum and Community Learning and Development Services would be reduced.
• Potential inequity in provision of services across geographical boundaries.

£0

• Live Argyll delivers a range of library and fitness services. This budget supports the delivery of these services. 

£0

• Increased investment would increase the sustainability of our services.

£0

• This would result in widespread closure of all buildings and the Council would not meet the legal duty to achieve Net Zero by 2045.

£0

• There will be a need to significantly reduce staff structures and management arrangements of the various teams. This will include amalgamation of management roles.
• Many properties would need to close on the basis that there would be no maintenance budget to allow compliance with building/workplace legislation.
• The Utility Fund would disappear which combined with there being no resources to deal with Carbon Reduction/Net Zero would mean it is highly unlikely that the Council will reduce its carbon footprint/achieve net zero within the necessary timescale (2045).

£0

• There will be a need to significantly reduce staff structures and management arrangements of the various teams. This will include amalgamation of management roles.
• The greater the budget decrease the higher the probability that we would be unable to maintain whichever council buildings remain open to acceptable standards.
• The Utility Fund would disappear which combined with the reduction in resources to deal with Carbon Reduction/Net Zero would impact on the Council's ability to reduce carbon/achieve net zero within the necessary timescale (2045).

£0

• Alter staff structures and management arrangements of the various teams. This will include amalgamation of management roles. The Council's Out-of-Hours/On Call Property Officer Service would cease.
• Multiple buildings would need to close on the basis that there would be no maintenance budget to allow compliance with building/workplace related legislation.
• The Utility Fund would disappear which combined with the reduction in resources to deal with Carbon Reduction/Net Zero would impact on the Council's ability to reduce carbon/achieve net zero within the necessary timescale (2045).

£0

• There will be a need to alter staff structures, reduce staff headcount / hours and management arrangements of the various teams. This is likely to include amalgamation of management roles. The Council's Out-of-Hours/On Call Property Officer Service would cease.
• Some properties would need to close on the basis that there would be no maintenance budget to allow compliance with building/workplace related legislation.
• The Utility Fund would disappear which would start to impact on the Council's ability to reduce carbon/achieve net zero within the necessary timescale (2045).

£0

• Current level of service continues.

£0

• Slight increase in capacity to carry out maintenance on properties.
• Possibly procure some additional resource to assist with the Net Zero journey.

£0

• Without a team that prioritises communication and engagement services, it would be significantly more difficult for communities to get information about the council
• Media would have no point of contact to get enquiries answered for their papers etc;
• No support for councillors in promoting council policies and decisions
• Employees would not have the information they need to deliver services in what are challenging times for councils.
• 4 full time and 2 part time jobs lost.

£0

• Resources are already spread thinly across different areas of work – communities, media, employees, councillors, addressing the challenges of Argyll and Bute as a whole, and others. Reducing this support by 50% across all areas would make it ineffective.  
• We would therefore have to stop providing some of our services, so we could provide a few services well enough to actually make a difference for people.
• Job losses.

£0

• Focus on highest priority tasks. This would reduce information available for communities about services, support, and council decisions that could affect them; increase the risk of us missing deadlines for responding to public and media enquiries, and delays in information and support for employees and councillors.
• Increased reduction in posts.

£0

• As well as having to reduce the level of our communication services for communities, employees, councillors and others, we would have to stop some of our services, which could include community engagement exercises, or our work to support Argyll and Bute’s economy, through attracting the skills and people Argyll and Bute’s future needs.
• Reduction in posts.

£0

• Reduce our ability to produce and provide information about council services, support and decisions, and reduce promotion aimed at attracting skills and investment Argyll and Bute needs.
• It could also stop us providing support in developing communities’ involvement with the council, by stopping our work in developing and promoting opportunities for on-line ‘have your say’ exercises and risks a reduction in staffing levels.

£0

• We would continue to support day-to-day life in Argyll and Bute, by informing our communities and responding to thousands of enquiries every year about services and support available; and the area’s longer term future through promotion of the area as a place to work and invest.
• We would also continue to inform and involve council employees in council matters affecting them so we can deliver change effectively where needed.

£0

• More opportunities for our communities to get the support they need from the council, and get involved in having their say in developing how the council works.
• Increased promotion of Argyll and Bute to support the area in beating competition for the skills, investment and workforce needed for its future.

£0

• The council would have to make alternative arrangements to provide a Registration Service.

£0

• Customer Service Point and Registration Service Districts would be located solely in the four large mainland town offices and registrars would cease to offer outside civil ceremonies; with consequent impact on registration and wedding tourism income.
• Customer services would be exclusively digital only platforms, with very limited customer agent capacity directed at high priority services, such as vulnerable customers and the remainder directed to automated and online services.
• Digital development would be confined to care and maintenance of core systems.

£0

• There would be a significant degradation of customer care standards for timeliness and quality of response, with long call waiting and email/eform response times.
• Both the Customer Service Point and Registration service would need to be rationalised, with 3-4 local offices and registration districts closed. The Home Based Registration service on smaller islands would also be ceased, along with all non statutory registration services.
• Digital Support and Development Teams would be reduced and hence their capacity for designing and implementing new digital services. Only essential changes could be actioned, with no proactive development, for example of emerging new technologies.

£0

• There would be fewer customer service agents to deal with customer enquiries and applications through telephone and digital channels. Customers would wait longer for a response or decision, and Customer Service Agents would have less time to assist with complex needs like benefit claims.
• Less capacity to assist with emergency response situations or seasonal and other administrative exercises, such as Blue Badge applications and poverty related grants.
• The Registration Service could only offer core statutory services relating to birth, deaths and marriages with fewer appointment slots to register births, deaths and marriages.

£0

• There would be fewer customer service agents to deal with customer enquiries and applications through telephone and digital channels.
• Customers would wait longer for a response or decision, particularly during times of heavy demand
• Customer Service Agents would have less time to assist with complex needs like benefit claims.

£0

• As the budget remains the same, we would continue to provide the same level of service, assuming we would meet any supplier side inflationary increases through continual improvement and efficiencies. 

£0

• We could recruit and train two additional digital apprentices as part of our “grow our own” policy and they would help keep Argyll and Bute at the cutting edge of effective digital service delivery by maintaining existing systems and helping to develop others, such as new online request forms and improving our website information.

£0

• Failure to meet statutory duties.

£0

• Severe reduction in staff numbers.
• Inability to meet statutory duties, and likely risk of the financial failure of the council.

£0

• Major reduction in funds to provide support to households in need, and in income collected.
• Substantial reduction in support for effective financial management through reduced audits.
• Significant staff cuts, and issues in meeting statutory duties.

£0

• Customers would have to wait longer for benefits, crisis grants, and supplier payments.
• Substantial reduction in support for effective financial management, through reduced audits.
• Risk of loss of investment income and increased banking/borrowing costs.
• Increased level of staff cuts would be required.

£0

• Reduction in benefits advice to customers and delays in processing benefits claims.
• Reduced support for effective use of council funds through all scrutiny work being stopped and a reduction in core audit days.
• Staff cuts would be required.

£0

• Service would be maintained at current level.

£0

• More resilience in the service to minimize processing backlogs, maximize level of support to low income households, increase recovery of taxes levied, ensure prompt payment to external businesses and staff, increase audit support for effective use of public funds.
• Investment in new technologies to enhance the council’s ability to plan and deliver transformational change and improve stakeholders’ access  to the Council’s financial information.

£0

• No centralised HR function.
• The council would need to source alternative arrangements for professional HR guidance and managing employee contracts, performance reporting and meeting its equalities duties.

£0

• There would be a risk for the council in meeting its statutory requirements.

£0

• Professional advice and support would be further limited and prioritising the most complex matters.
• Statutory requirements would be the priority for systems and policy development. 
• Significantly less capacity to support development and negotiation of local conditions of service.
• Future focused talent management initiatives such as Growing our own would cease to be developed.

£0

• The ability to develop corporate systems such as the HR and Payroll system would be extremely limited with a focus on any statutory updates associated with pay and conditions.
• Policy development activities would focus on prioritising statutory policies such as equalities.
• Significantly less capacity to support development and negotiation of local conditions of service.
• Teams across the council would have limited access to advice and guidance.

£0

• Less money invested in training and developing our staff and leaders.
• Teams across the council may need to wait longer for advice and guidance and data/ reports.

£0

• With no change to the budget the service would remain largely as it is.

£0

• Additional budget would allow the team to consider, in consultation with internal customers, additional activities that would support teams across the council.
• Resource for a project that would allow us to develop and programme Artificial Intelligence which could replace elements of the advice line/improve our online guidance and further automate processes and procedures reducing demand for advice services over time.

£0

• The Council needs ICT support to function.

£0

• We would not meet our statutory duties to maintain a secure and safe working environment for pupils and staff so we cannot take this level of savings. 

£0

• Severely impact our ability to support digital transformation with a reduction in the number of Project Leaders and Client Liaison Officers and ICT Management. We would be unable to support the introduction of new or upgraded systems and would manage the application environment on an as is basis.
• We would downgrade Microsoft licences and invest in the minimal licensing level to allow staff to communicate using the basic web-based tools. This would remove key security protection from devices and servers and create a major threat to the security of all systems and data without added the added security, telephony, and data management benefits of the current licensed estate.

£0

• The loss of 5 desktop engineers would result in a huge reduction of services to schools. Primary Schools would then look be required after their own ICT requirements including PC and device support, PC and device setup and installation, application management, security management).
• This would result in the loss of standards and an inability to provide a secure and safe online working environment in schools.
• Severely impact our ability to support digital transformation with our partners such as the NHS and HSCP which could impact the support of vulnerable service users and national initiatives such as Federation, Digital Telecare and the National Care service.

£0

• A reduction in bandwidth to schools and offices, which would cause network bottlenecks in schools and offices and interrupt the smooth operations of learning and teaching and of corporate and education systems.
• The removal of the Security Operations Centre would expose the Council to serious risk. The new SOC is providing a 24 hour a day monitoring service and is constantly scanning our network environment to protect us from an ever-increasing cyber threat.
• The removal of the Kilmory Print and Mail service would result in the loss of 3 posts and would mean we could no longer produce in house print runs for benefits cheques, H&SCP care letters, bills, and debtor invoices. There would no longer be a central mail facility in Kilmory.

£0

• Whilst remaining as a cost-effective ICT Service, there is insufficient engineering resource to meet the demands for the Device for Every Child initiative. The schools digital requirement is expected to expand rapidly but resources are not available to cope with the expansion.
• We have a single officer dealing with the increasing cyber security threat. This is becoming more and more demanding and additional resources are required to help manage the threat.

£0

• Increase the number of engineers supporting schools and the “Device for Every Child” and an increasing security burden.
• Additional engineering support to keep our environment safe and secure from the escalating threat of cyber attacks.

£0

• Airports are regulated by the Civil Aviation Authority, in relation to safety and other elements of running an airport. Reducing the budget would mean we could no longer comply with regulations required to operate.

£0

• Airports are regulated by the Civil Aviation Authority, in relation to safety and other elements of running an airport. Reducing the budget would mean we could no longer comply with regulations required to operate.

£0

• Airports are regulated by the Civil Aviation Authority, in relation to safety and other elements of running an airport. Reducing the budget would mean we could no longer comply with regulations required to operate.
• Increased likelihood of job losses.

£0

• Airports are regulated by the Civil Aviation Authority, in relation to safety and other elements of running an airport. Reducing the budget would mean we could no longer comply with regulations required to operate.
• Risk of job losses.

£0

• To operate, the council must have a CAA (Civil Aviation Authority) licence for each of its airports, in Oban, Coll and Colonsay; flights are used by pupils, residents and visitors.
• The maintenance budget cannot be reduced if we are to meet maintenance and operational regulations needed to have the licence. Condition 2 of CAA Licence states “No aircraft shall take-off or land at the aerodrome unless such fire-fighting and rescue services and such medical services and equipment as are required in respect of such aircraft in the CAA's publication CAP 168 (Licensing of Aerodromes) are provided there. Such services and equipment shall at all times when the aerodrome is available for the take-off or landing of aircraft be kept fit and ready for immediate turnout”
• Risk of job losses.

£0

• Inflation and other rising costs put an additional burden on the maintenance budget for airports.
• Maintenance budgets for airports must pay for services that ensure we meet compulsory, wide ranging safety and other regulations, covering everything from morse code signaling equipment, in-flight and ground communication systems, lighting and fuel systems, radio frequency licences, runway and vehicle safety maintenance, and fire safety equipment.

£0

• Additional fire fighter cover in event of sickness/leave – both on islands of Colonsay/Coll and at Oban.
• Positive increase to Airports’ maintenance budget.

£0

• No capacity to provide local support to start-up and developing businesses (advice, information, signposting).
• Failure to meet Business Gateway minimum service specification.
• Web-based self-serve support only from bgateway.com.
• No capacity to deliver the externally funded UKSPF business support (grants and specialist advice).

£0

• Insufficient capacity to provide local support to start-up and developing businesses (advice, information, signposting).
• Failure to meet Business Gateway minimum service specification.
• Shift to web-based self-serve support from bgateway.com, with significant reduction in access to business adviser support.

£0

• Further staff cuts required, further limiting capacity to provide local support to start-up and developing businesses (advice, information, signposting); and
• Restricted access to business support services, focusing on priority businesses only.

£0

• Further staff cuts required, further limiting capacity to provide local support to start-up and developing businesses (advice, information, signposting); and/or
• Restricted access to business support services, focusing on priority businesses only.

£0

• Staff cuts likely to be required, limiting capacity to provide local support to start-up and developing businesses (advice, information, signposting); or
• Restricted access to business support services, focusing on priority businesses only.

£0

• Business Gateway local support to start-up and developing businesses is maintained (advice, information, signposting).

£0

• Business Gateway local support to start-up and developing businesses is maintained (advice, information, signposting).
• Potential for a small increase in scale or scope of existing business support services, aligned to priorities.

£0

• We would not comply with legislative requirements in relation to community participation.

£0

• Over 60 community groups and organisations per year at risk of no longer receiving opportunity of funding.
• 30-35 less community groups supported per year due to service efficiencies.
• Further reduction of approximately 135 capacity building support sessions with community groups (includes advice and support on funding, governance, engaging with community, developing plans).

£0

• 20% reduction in the Supporting Communities Fund resulting in a reduction of approx. 20 less groups per year receiving funding for local projects and activities.
• 20% reduction to support for Gaelic Fèis activities impacting external contract with Fèisean nan Gàidheal
• Due to potential efficiencies through staffing, reduced capacity to support community groups.

£0

• Potential changes to staffing support to community groups.
• Resulting in a reduction of approximately 54 capacity building support sessions with community groups (includes advice and support on funding, governance, engaging with community, developing plans).
• Reduced support to 10-15 community groups.

£0

• 10% reduction in the Supporting Communities Fund resulting in a reduction of approximately. 10 groups per year receiving funding for local projects and activities; potential changes to staffing administering fund.
• 10% reduction to support for Gaelic Fèis activities impacting external contract with Fèisean nan Gàidheal.
• Reduced information to communities about funds that can support them. 

£0

• No change in the structure of this service.  

£0

• Support to council services in engaging with communities on service design.
• Package of support to community councils to assist with growth and development and engagement in communities.
• Increased support to community groups and organisations seeking to lease, own or otherwise develop a council asset.

£0

• No capacity to provide local support to communities and sectors or existing contracts; no capacity to support externally funded teams.
• No ability to apply for or access or manage funding streams.
• No ability to deliver place-based regeneration projects in our communities.

£0

• Insufficient capacity to provide local support to communities and sectors and no ability to access external funding and deliver meaningful regeneration or deliver place-based regeneration.
• Shift to web-based self-serve support for Economic growth.
• Very limited capacity to support externally funded teams.
• No ability to apply for or access or manage funding streams.

£0

• Further staff cuts will be required significantly limiting capacity to provide local support to communities and sectors and ability to access external funding and deliver regeneration; or
• Loss of staff and resulting resources will significantly restrict access to Economic Services, limiting focus to selected priority projects and/or interventions only.

£0

• Further staff cuts will be required, limiting capacity to provide local support to communities and sectors and ability to access external funding and deliver regeneration; or
• Further restricted access to Economic Services, increased risk in management of grant contracts, challenging to even focus on the main priority projects and/or interventions.

£0

• Staff cuts likely to be required, limiting capacity to provide local support to communities and sectors and deliver meaningful community regeneration; and or
• Restricted access to Economic Services, focusing on key priority projects and/or interventions.

£0

• Maintains the delivery of externally funded support activity.
• Deliver Strategic Events and Festival funding rounds, small grants for regeneration purposes.

£0

• Economic Growth support to local Economic Service provision is maintained.
• Potential for a small increase in scale or scope of existing Economic Services support services, aligned to priorities.
• Limited potential to support community regeneration projects with micro funding offers. 

£0

• Increased number of failed tenancies and evictions.
• Rough sleeping significantly increased. 
• Anti-social behavior increases.
• Increased NHS demand, potential for increased mortality.
• Housing waiting lists lengthen.
• No common repairs supported.
• Less vulnerable households able to sustain their accommodation. 
• No women’s refuge maintained.
• Unable to house offenders.
• Intervention from Scottish Government and Scottish Housing Regulator.

£0

• Increased number of failed tenancies and evictions.
• Rough sleeping significantly increased. 
• Anti-social behavior increases.
• Increased NHS demand, potential for increased mortality.
• Housing waiting lists lengthen.
• No common repairs supported. 
• Vulnerable households not able to sustain their accommodation.  Difficulty maintaining women’s refuge.
• Difficulty housing offenders.
• Intervention from Scottish Government and Scottish Housing Regulator.

£0

• Housing advice and information work would need to be further reduced, impacting on the ability of vulnerable people to maintain tenancies, increasing homeless presentations and pressure on NHS and Social Care demands.
• Longer lengths on housing waiting list. 
• Little or no support for common repairs.
• Reduced support for vulnerable households within their homes. 
• Intervention from Scottish Government and Scottish Housing Regulator.

£0

• Housing advice and information work would need to be further reduced, impacting on the ability of vulnerable people to maintain tenancies, increasing homeless presentations and pressure on NHS, Social Care and Registered Social Landlords.
• Reduced support for common repairs issues. 

£0

• Housing advice and information work would need to be reduced, impacting on the ability of vulnerable people to maintain tenancies, increasing homeless presentations and pressure on NHS, Social Care and Registered Social Landlord demands.

£0

• If the level of investment for this service remains the same, there would be minimal change.  

£0

• Increased resources to support households with securing suitable accommodation, to support vulnerable households in sustaining their accommodation, and to improve capacity to cater for people with complex needs.
• Increased resources to support the supply of homeless temporary accommodation across the local authority area.

£0

• Failure to deliver vital environmental services. 
• No protection of rights of way or access.
• No protection of marine and land environment and biodiversity. 
• No protection of enhancement of historic built environment. 
• No processing of planning applications and complete loss of local control over development.
• Inability of development industry to function.
• No enforcement of planning regulations with very significant adverse impacts upon the environment, property value, and amenity. 
• No new housing development.
• Scottish Government intervention.
• Widespread substantial economic and environmental impact.

£0

• Limited ability to deliver vital environmental services. 
• Limited protection of rights of way or access.
• Limited protection of marine and land environment and biodiversity. 
• Limited protection of enhancement of historic built environment.
• Limited processing of planning applications and significantly increased timescales for determination – significantly diminished local control over development as a significant volume of planning applications would ultimately require to be determined by Scottish Government on appeal.
• Inability of development industry to function.
• Very limited planning enforcement activity resulting in significant adverse effects upon the environment, property value and amenity.
• Limited new housing development.
• Scottish Government intervention. 
• Significant negative economic and environmental impact.

£0

• Further increased impact on points listed under 5% consequences. 
• Negative economic and environmental impact.

£0

• Increased impact on points listed under 5% consequences.
• Minor economic and environmental impact.

£0

• Reduction in ability to deliver vital environmental services.
• Reduced ability to protect rights of way or access, marine and land environment and biodiversity, and historic built environment. 
• Slightly increased time to process planning applications.
• Reduced ability of development industry to function. 
• Increased time to respond to complaints and enforce planning regulations.
• Reduced new housing development.
• Slight economic and environmental impact.

£0

• With no change in resources there would be no significant change.  

£0

• This level of increase would allow some consultancy to be brought in to assist delivery of key pieces of work and would assist with maintaining current performance levels in the determination of planning applications, enforcement of planning regulations and preparation of plans whilst dealing with the increasing workload from new legislation which is being introduced.

£0

• Council would return verifiers license to Scottish Government meaning that there is no local service within Argyll and Bute. Significant impact to economy and building sector in Argyll and Bute.
• Increased risk to public safety and buildings fall into further disrepair or dangerous buildings.
• Council would fail to meet its statutory duties under the Buildings (Scotland) Act 2023.

£0

• Council will risk losing its verifiers license from the Scottish Government which will mean we can no longer verify building warrants or issue completion certificates.
• Poor service which will adversely impact on construction sector, works to buildings and the economy.

£0

• Performance against key national performance measures will fall below national performance targets creating a risk to current verifiers status.
• No capacity to deal with fluctuations in work.
• Unable to deliver any commercial work which will result in further budget pressure of £100K annually.

£0

• Performance against key national performance measures will fall.
• No capacity to deal with any increase in building warrant work or responses to dangerous buildings etc.
• Introduce pre- warrant application fees and increase general fees and charges.
• Unable to deliver any commercial work which will result in further budget pressure of £100K annually.

£0

• Performance against key national performance measures will fall but should still meet targets.

£0

• Provides a professional building standards service which strives to meet customer demands, supports the local economy and protects public safety.

£0

• Maintains the current building standard service which is regarded by Scottish Government as a “strong performing building standards service”.
• Would be better equipped to deal with the increasing demands of poorly maintained property in our communities.

£0

• Failure by Council to meet statutory duties.

£0

• Council will fail to meet statutory duties.

£0

• A 15% reduction in expenditure would require the Council to redesign its priorities and stop statutory work it currently delivers.
• Potential risk for meeting statutory duties.
• Loss of services to public, businesses and communities.

£0

• Stop some services and increase charges for others.
• Food and other inspections to manufacturing and high-risk businesses only. Only investigate service requests where formal action is appropriate and otherwise public advised to take their own civil actions.
• Potential risk for meeting statutory duties.
• Redesign administrative arrangements with better use of digital.

£0

• A 5% reduction in expenditure would require the Council to seek efficiencies in how we currently deliver the service.
• Potential risk for meeting statutory duties.
• Response timescales and quality of services will reduce.
• Fees and charges will increase.

£0

• Service is maintained at current level.

£0

• An increase in the budget would enable the service to recruit additional resources and improve services through better use of systems and digital technology.

£0

• The removal of this budget would result in no additional support for learning.
• It would also mean no support at break times for any children with additional support needs.
• The service would fail to meet the requirements of the statutory duty.

£0

• Closure of all Learning Centers within mainstream schools and significant reduction in capacity of Argyll and Bute’s specialist provision.
• This combined with the loss of support services in school would mean it is challenging for the service to meet the requirements of the statutory duty.

£0

• Loss of visual and auditory specialist teachers directly impacting on pupils’ attainment and staff training.
• Loss of 10 Additional Support Needs Assistants, which would significantly impact on support in the class but also support at break and lunchtimes.

£0

• This reduction would lead to further loss of 5 pupil support teachers across the local authority.
• There would be the loss of 4 Additional Support Need Assistants which would not only impact on support in the class but also support at break and lunchtimes.
• A delay in the ability of the service to effectively plan for children and young people with additional support needs.

£0

• This could mean the removal of 4 Education Support Officer Posts, resulting in schools coordinating their own ASN teacher and support Hours.
• Schools would be required to assess and agree who has the greatest need for support.
• Headteachers would need to agree local allocations of support for additional support needs and undertake all the associated HR processes.
• No central support, training or advice will be available to schools.

£0

• As the level of investment for this service has remained the same, there would be no change in the structure of this service.  

£0

• The current demand for Additional Support Need provision continues to grow post pandemic. An increase in budget would result in being better able to meet need and provide specialist intervention across the local authority.

£0

• No Early Learning and Childcare settings would be available and we would fail to meet our statutory duty.

£0

• The service has a statutory duty to deliver ELC for eligible children. To meet this duty  there would be a significant reduction in the ELC workforce resulting in closure of almost half our ELCs.
• Parents would be required to transport children to ELCs in towns where there may be insufficient capacity to meet need. 

£0

• A reduction of this level could result in the removal of all lead Practitioners from large ELCs and closure of the smallest ELCs.
• There would be multiple job losses.
• Parents in affected areas would be require to transport their child to an alternative ELC.
• Children would not be well placed to transition to school.
• This is likely to place more pressure on the additional support need budget for schools as more children will require support for learning.

£0

• This could result in the closure of up to 10 of the smallest ELCs which exist in our most rural communities.
• Parents would be required to transport children to the nearest alternative ELC provision.
• This will impact on those already most isolated and could mean some parents are unable to use the 1140 placement for their child.
• A reduction of this size could result in job losses.

£0

• This would see the removal of all Lead Practitioner posts from ELCs, removing leadership from our larger ELCs.
• This would reduce literacy, numeracy and wellbeing support for children.
• This role also provides cover for staff absences, not providing the cover could mean that children have to be sent home due to lack of staff.
• Children would not be as well placed as they are currently to transition to school.

£0

• As the level of investment for this service has remained the same, there would be no change in the structure of this service.  

£0

• Recruitment of 8 Lead Practitioners across the area who could support parent and toddler groups.
• These posts would support practitioners to raise standards in early literacy and numeracy.
• Support in developing the use of the outdoors and local environment to further enhance learning.

£0

• Statutory duty would not be met.
• All children on external specialist placements will be placed in local schools. Resulting in the reassessment and reallocating of existing resources significantly affecting support for more than 200/260 learners across our schools. The needs of the children returning are unlikely to be effectively met.

£0

• Half of the children currently in specialist day and residential placements will return to home/local authority care and will be placed in local schools, reducing placements available for other children.
• To support these children existing resources will need to be reassessed and reallocated, impacting significantly on the additional support provision for 100/130 children currently receiving this support in our schools.
• The needs of the children returning are unlikely to be effectively met. It will be extremely challenging to meet our statutory duty.

£0

• 2 children from specialist day placements and 2 children from specialist residential placement will return to local schools requiring support from existing resources.
• 30/40 children with additional support needs will have their learning support affected by this reassessment and reallocation of resources. 
• The needs of the children returning from specialist placements are unlikely to be effectively met without extremely significant investment.

£0

• 2 children in specialist residential placements would return to care within the local authority and require specialist support to access education.
• This support will mean the removal of ASN (Additional Support Needs) support for between 25-30 children with complex needs in our schools. 
• The needs of the children returning from specialist placements are unlikely to be effectively met without significant investment.
• The home setting will require support targeted and long term from social work with budgetary consequence. 

£0

• 2 children would return from external specialist day placement and require high level support to attend local school.
• This would mean that support for 8/10 other children with complex needs in schools would need to be reassessed and reallocated.
• The needs of the children returning from specialist placements are unlikely to be effectively met without significant investment.

£0

• As the level of investment has remained the same, there would be no change in the delivery of this service.  

£0

• 1 additional placement can be made to an external day placement.

£0

• The council would not be able to meet its statutory duty as an Education Authority.

£0

• This is likely to mean stopping all practical subjects across schools as there would be no budget for consumable resources.
• Only emergency teacher cover available so classes may have to be sent home when no teacher is available.
• An increase in use of remote learning.
• No supported study or Spring revision support for qualifications.
• Removal of all breakfast and afterschool clubs.

£0

• This could result in a reduction in cover for teacher absence across all schools leading to school leaders teaching more regularly and unable to commit to leadership functions.
• It is likely to lead to increased response times to parental enquiries.
• It could lead to the delay of Child Planning meetings and meetings with parents and other services which support children; and to schools being unable to replace or update learning and teaching materials.

£0

• This could result in a reduction in flexibility to cover staff absences.

£0

• A reduction at this level may resulting in reduced learning and teaching resources.
• Schools may be unable to fund travel for swimming/outdoor learning and local outings.

£0

• As the level of investment for this service has remained the same, there would be no change in the service.

£0

• This increase could be used by schools in a variety of ways to increase educational visits and or purchase more learning resources which in turn would improve attainment and achievement.

£0

• Not achievable.

£0

• No Senior Councillor Appointments
• No travel or accommodation.
• Only basic salaries for all Councillors.

£0

• Meetings moved to be fully remote to provide savings in travel and accommodation.
• Travel etc. on a case by case basis and only where deemed necessary.
• Review of Senior Councillor Appointments to reduce the numbers or salary.

£0

• Member expenses and travel and accommodation requests would require to be given higher level of scrutiny.
• More meetings held on a fully remote basis could negate the need for travel.
• Senior Councillor Salaries could be reduced or amended.

£0

• Efficiencies could be made in terms of Member expenses.
• More scrutiny of travel and accommodation requests.

£0

• A similar level of provision would be maintained.

£0

• Opportunity to increase members’ payments. 

£0

• The Council would have to seek alternative arrangements for the delivery of this statutory service

£0

• A 50% reduction would result in the reduction of posts and the Council would have to seek alternative arrangements for the delivery of this statutory service. 

£0

• A 15% reduction would require a significant service redesign.
• Likely reduction in partnership working as well as the reductions detailed above.

 

 

£0

• A 10% reduction would require some service redesign.
• All current service delivery would be maintained but there would be a reduction in up-skilling the 2 staff team in terms of training and through their attendance at seminars etc.

£0

• A 5% reduction would require some service redesign.
• All current service delivery would be maintained but there may be delays in some areas.

£0

• At a similar level of resource there would be no change required and the delivery of the service would remain the same.

£0

• This would increase resources for supporting communities if an emergency event happened.  

£0

• The Council decision making arrangements would cease to operate as would the Election function.

£0

• Support for Elected Members would be dramatically reduced or removed in full. 
• Support for Area Community Planning would stop.
• The Anti-Social Behaviour function, support for community councils, and the council’s meeting schedule would be reduced.
• The Council would not be able to manage Electoral processes.

£0

• A 15% reduction would require a significant service redesign.  There will be a reduction in the number of posts.
• Support for Elected Members would be reduced
• Likely that there would require to be a reduction to the service provided to Area Community Planning Groups.

£0

• A 10% reduction would require service redesign.  This will likely involve a reduction in the number of posts.
• There would be a reduction in the service that could be provided particularly in terms of Elected Member support.

£0

• A 5% reduction would require some service redesign.
• All current service delivery would be maintained but there may be delays in some areas.

£0

• At a similar level of resource there would be no change required and the delivery of the service would remain the same.

£0

• An increase in resource would allow for more support to be provided for Elected Members.
• There could also be a review of the Council’s Decision making arrangements and Members could decide to increase the frequency of some meetings using this additional resource.

£0

• A 100% reduction would result in the Council having to seek alternative arrangements for the delivery of this service.

£0

• A 50% reduction would result in the reduction of posts and the Council would have to seek alternative arrangements for the delivery of this service in terms of its statutory obligations.

£0

• A 15% reduction would require a significant service redesign and would involve a reduction in the number of posts and a further reduction in the service being provided across each area of work.

£0

• A 10% reduction would require some service redesign which is likely to involve a reduction in the number of FTE and a reduction in the service being provided across each area of work.

£0

• A 5% reduction would require some service redesign.
• All current service delivery would be maintained but there may be delays in some areas. 

£0

• The delivery of the service would remain the same.

£0

• This would provide funding to allow consideration of employing a trainee which would provide support to the team and be positive in respect of succession planning.

£0

• The Council would have to seek alternative arrangements for the delivery of this service.

£0

• A 50% reduction would result in the reduction of posts and the Council would have to seek alternative arrangements for the delivery of this service to meet statutory obligations placed on it.

£0

• This would require a significant service redesign to seek efficiencies and would involve a reduction in the number of posts and a further reduction in the service being provided across each area of work.

£0

• This would require some service redesign which is likely to involve a reduction in the number of posts and a reduction in the service being provided across each area of work.

£0

• This would require some service redesign to be able to continue co-ordinating the council’s response to enquiries such as Freedom of Information (FOI)or Data Protection enquiries.
• All current service delivery would be maintained but there may be delays in some areas.

£0

• At a similar level of resource there would be no change required and the delivery of the service would remain the same.

£0

• This would provide funding to allow consideration of employing further admin support which would provide support to the team and be positive in respect of succession planning.

£0

• The Council would require to identify an alternative means of accessing a legal service to ensure compliance with its statutory duties and responsibilities.

£0

• The provision of legal advice would be severely restricted and support to services such as social work, education and human resources would cease.
• Significant risk of service failure.
• Strong likelihood of the Council being exposed to increased litigation.

£0

• There would be a reduction in staffing levels.
• Ability to respond to urgent requests for advice and support in areas such as child protection would be reduced.
• Certain areas of work may require to stop such as debt recovery, processing of certain insurance claims.

£0

• The redesign would require to focus on the delivery of a priority based service with the emphasis on the statutory areas of service delivery.
• Risk of reduction in staffing levels.
• Lower service response rates in all areas of service. 

£0

• There would be delays in service delivery in non-statutory areas.

£0

• The current level of service would continue.

£0

• An increase in resource would allow for increased support to be provided in areas such as planning inquiries, enhanced training provision, participation in major developments at an early stage.

£0

• The Council would have to seek alternative arrangements for the delivery of all procurement activity
• The Council would not be able to meet its statutory requirements for all spend over £50k.

£0

• Procurement support for services would be reduced or removed in full. 
• A self-service approach would be required for all good/supplies/services and works below statutory thresholds.

£0

• This would require a significant service redesign and reduction in posts.
• The level of direct purchasing support would reduce significantly with services expected to carry out their own purchasing, and the level of contract management support to services would be impacted.

£0

• This would require service redesign and reduction in the number of posts.
• The level of direct purchasing support would reduce significantly with council services expected to carry out their own purchasing.

£0

• This would require some service redesign.
• All current service delivery would be maintained but there may be delays in some areas.

£0

• At a similar level of resource there would be no change required and the delivery of the service would remain the same.

£0

• An increase in resource would allow for more support to be provided for Council services in how they purchase their goods and services, and manage their contracts.

£0

• A 100% reduction would result in the Council having to seek alternative arrangements for the delivery of this service.

£0

A 50% reduction would result in:

• the reduction of posts
• significant risk that the Council would have to seek alternative arrangements for the delivery of this service to meet statutory obligations.

£0

A 15% reduction would require:

• a significant service redesign.
• a reduction in the number of posts.
• a further reduction in the service being provided across each area of work.

£0

• A 10% reduction would require some service redesign to seek efficiencies which is likely to involve a reduction in the number of FTE and a reduction in the service being provided across each area of work.

£0

• A 5% reduction would require some service redesign to seek efficiencies.
• All current service delivery would be maintained but there may be delays in some areas.

£0

• At a similar level of resource there would be no change required and the delivery of the service would remain the same.

£0

• This would provide funding to allow consideration of employing admin support which would provide support to the team and be positive in respect of succession planning.

£0

• No burials or cremations will be able to take place.
• Burial grounds would be left to grow wild and would become inaccessible and unsafe.

£0

• Reduced lair availability and reduced burial times would be available.
• Maintenance only carried out in burial grounds where interments are taking place, no maintenance to closed burial grounds.
• This could be offset by a significant increase in fees and charges to balance the budget.

£0

• Reduced lair availability and reduced burial time availability.
• Only essential maintenance of burial grounds, no maintenance to closed burial grounds.
• Inability to maintain cemeteries and the grounds of the Crematorium to an acceptable standard, this could be offset by corresponding increase in fees and charges to balance the budget.

£0

• Reduced grass cutting and strimming, areas becoming unsightly.
• A reduction in pathway maintenance such as weedkilling and sweeping.
• Taking longer to carry out the levelling of sunken lairs, this becomes a health and safety issues to visitor and mourners alike.

£0

• A reduction in cleanliness operations within burial grounds, reduction in litter bin servicing, strimming around headstones and other features, resulting in burial grounds becoming more unsightly.

£0

• We continue to deliver a range of services.

£0

• An  increase would support delivery of our range of services and our ability to react and respond to ad-hoc issues such as litter and general tidiness of cemeteries.

£0

• The council would have to seek alternative arrangements for complying with the Control of Dogs Act.

£0

• Warden coverage of the geographical area reduced by 50% - very little enforcement would be achieved.
• Increase in fly tipping, dog fouling, litter etc.
• Inability to effectively carry out duties under the Control of Dogs Act.

£0

• The service would further reduce the duties it covers.

£0

• The service would reduce the duties currently covered.

£0

• Less action taken to deal with littering, fly tipping, dog control, dog fouling, stray dogs, abandoned vehicles, enforcement of waste collections and commercial waste duty of care).

£0

• The Warden service covers litter enforcement, fly tipping, dog control, dog fouling, stray dogs, abandoned vehicles, enforcement of waste collections and commercial waste duty of care (commercial agreements).
• The service would continue at around its current level.

£0

• The Warden service covers litter enforcement, fly tipping, dog control, dog fouling, stray dogs, abandoned vehicles, enforcement of waste collections and commercial waste duty of care (commercial agreements.
• An increased budget would increase our ability to deliver this range of duties. 

£0

• The Council would have no vehicles through which to deliver its services.  

£0

• This would have a significant impact across all services.
• Possible changes could mean less frequent and reliable bin collections and a compromised home care service.  
• The Council would not be capable of fulfilling its statutory obligations in providing a service if funding was decreased by 50%.

£0

• This would mean services would need to change in line with the available fleet.
• Statutory services would remain the focus of service provision. 
• Possible changes could mean longer wait times for home care services, longer response times to road repairs etc.  

£0

• This would affect all services in all areas from home care to bin collections and solely focus on statutory provision.

£0

• This would affect all services within the council. Fleet services focus would be the maintenance of vehicles and plant equipment which provide a statutory service. 

£0

• There would be no change to the current service provision.

£0

• The increase would allow Fleet services to undertake works that the budget cannot currently meet.

£0

• Removal of parking warden service which would increase the number of inconsiderate and dangerous parking events. This would significantly affect traffic management for our communities.
• No car park maintenance.

£0

• Removal of parking warden service which would increase the number of inconsiderate and dangerous parking events. This would significantly affect traffic management for our communities.
• Significant reduction to car park maintenance, priority given to pay and display car parks.

£0

• Staffing reduction, leading to increase in inconsiderate parking habits, and obstructions for drivers getting to where they need to be.
• Reduced upkeep of car parks such as sweeping and groundworks.

£0

• Staffing reduction, leading to increase in inconsiderate parking habits.

£0

• Staffing reduction, which would increase the risk of inconsiderate parking.

£0

• Current parking and traffic services would continue.

£0

• Increased spend would support services such as care and maintenance of car parks.

£0

• No open spaces or outdoor facilities for our communities.
• Deterioration of public areas due to no maintenance causing health and safety hazards to the public.

£0

• Reduction in outdoor facilities for young people.
• Loss of community asset.
• Major increase in dog fouling, littering and health and safety hazards due to reduced grass cutting.
• Deterioration of public areas due to reduced maintenance resulting in increased costs to bring these back into usable service.

£0

• Reduction in outdoor facilities for young people.
• Sports fields not presentable for football, shinty etc.
• Loss of community asset.
• Increase in dog fouling, littering and health and safety hazards due to reduced grass cutting.
• HLF funding implications (possible claim back of funding if Hermitage Park were to be closed).

£0

• Reduction in outdoor facilities for young people.
• Loss of community asset.

£0

• Reduction in aesthetical appearance of areas.
• All maintenance on areas not under council ownership will cease, unless agreements can be made with landowner, e.g. Inveraray front green, large swathe of verges on the Isle of Bute.

£0

Current service continues.

£0

• Increase would support delivery of our range of services. 

£0

• No public conveniences will be provided by the council.

£0

• Facilities would close except for strategic areas where one public convenience would be provided.

£0

• Less available facilities for visitors and residents.
• The majority of the Council’s toilets would become seasonal, closing during autumn and winter months.
• Facilities requiring repairs may have to close until funding is available.

£0

• Less available toilets for visitors and residents.
• This may have an impact in providing welfare for key frontline services such as roads, waste and grounds operations.

£0

• Less available hours for visitors and residents.
• Some of the Council’s toilets would have to become seasonal, closing during the autumn and winter months.

£0

• Maintain public toilets service.

£0

• Increased capacity for delivering this non-statutory service. 

£0

• We would not be able to meet our legal duty to maintain the council’s public road network.

£0

• We would not be able to meet our legal duty to maintain the council’s public road network.

£0

• Significant decrease in inspection and maintenance of bridges and other assets, and ability to respond to unplanned or reactive works.
• Lifeline routes prioritised.

£0

• Further decrease in inspection and maintenance of bridges and other assets.
• Further reduction in ability to respond to unplanned or reactive works. 

£0

• Decrease in inspection and maintenance of 900 bridges and 1,000 retaining walls.
• Reduced ability to respond to unplanned or reactive works.

£0

• Continue to inspect and maintain bridges and other assets. 

£0

• 900 bridges, and road retaining structures need to be inspected and maintained. An increased budget would increase capacity for this work.

£0

• We could not comply with statutory requirements which rules out this level of savings.

£0

• We could not comply with statutory requirements which rules out this level of savings.

£0

• Reduced works for all activities including pot holing and jet patching which would reduce our overall road condition.
• Reduction to emergency works which would also see an increase in attendance and completion timescales.
• Reduction in verge maintenance, including grass and scrub cutting programmes, leading to sightline and overhanging trees issues and blocked ditches which will create hazards for drivers/riders and pedestrians.

£0

• Reduced capability in specific areas; increased risk to road users through a reduction in ditching, offlets and culvert cleaning.

£0

• Decrease to current works with more essential work being prioritised and less budget being available for works such as pot holing which will see an increase in poorer road surfaces.

£0

• The council maintains approx. 2,300km of public road network across mainland and island settings. This would continue at current levels of service. 

£0

• The council maintains approx. 2,300km of public road network across mainland and island settings. This increase would provide slightly more support in delivering maintenance services.

£0

• No inspection or maintenance of coastal protection and flood assets.
• Accelerated deterioration of 1000 Coastal Protection assets in Argyll and Bute.

£0

• Deterioration of assets because of significantly reduced level of inspection and maintenance of assets.
• Only Coastal Protection assets on Lifeline routes maintained.

£0

• Further reduced level of inspections and maintenance of assets.
• Coastal Protection and flooding assets on lifeline routes prioritised.
• Further reduced ability to respond to unplanned or reactive works.

£0

• Further reduction in capacity to inspect and maintain coastal protection and flood assets.
• Further reduction in ability to respond to unplanned or reactive work.
• Increased risk of flooding.

£0

• Less capacity to inspect and maintain coast protection and flood assets.
• Less able to respond to unplanned work.

£0

• 95% of Argyll and Bute’s population living within 5 miles of the coast and the council has a large network of flood protection assets. This budget would support delivery of flood and coastal protection services.

£0

• 95% of Argyll and Bute’s population living within 5 miles of the coast and the council has a large network of flood protection assets. This budget increase would support delivery of flood and coastal protection services.

£0

• The Council would be unable to meet its statutory obligations.
• Unable to transport eligible children and young people to their education establishment.
• Unable to subsidise any public transport services.

£0

• Public Transport – the service could not be provided if this funding is reduced.
• School Transport – not all existing home to school services would be provided resulting in the council not being able to meet its statutory obligations.

£0

• Public Transport – removal of public transport on busier routes resulting in fewer travel options for the public.

£0

• Public Transport – busier routes would be less frequent to meet this budget reduction.

£0

• Public Transport – complete removal of lesser used public transport services. This is likely to impact more rural communities where services are already limited and usage low.

£0

• The Council provides home to school transport for approx. 3000 children and young people per day, and subsidies public transport in various forms across Argyll and Bute. The budget would support delivery of these services.

£0

• The Council provides home to school transport for approx. 3,000 children and young people per day, and subsidises public transport in various forms across Argyll and Bute. The increase would support delivery of these services.

£0

• This is a non-statutory requirement for the Council.

£0

• This is a non-statutory requirement for the Council.
• Reduction in service and 10 full time equivalent posts lost.

£0

• This is a non-statutory requirement for the Council.
• Reduction in service and 3 full time equivalent posts lost.

£0

• This is a non-statutory requirement for the Council.
• Reduced service and 2 full time equivalent posts lost.

£0

• This is a non-statutory requirement for the Council.
• Reduction in service and 1 full time equivalent post lost.

£0

• Service continues with minimal change.
• Unable to provide budget for expenses and travel for reserve crossing patrollers which would mean when a patroller was absent from work there would be no cover.

£0

• Increased support for delivering the service.

£0

• No waste collections from any household or commercial premises.
• Council unable to meet its statutory duties.

£0

• Kerbside recycling and waste collection services are a statutory requirement.
• There would need to be a drastic cultural change from members of the public who would need to self-deliver parts of the service currently delivered by the council.
• Assisted uplifts could be reduced but the criteria would need to change prior to implementation, e.g. provision of medical certificates as evidence etc. Legislation would determine that some form of service offering would be required.
• Council unable to meet its statutory duties.

£0

• No service to limited access properties.
• Assisted uplifts could be reduced but the criteria would need to change prior to implementation, e.g. provision of medical certificates as evidence etc. Legislation would determine that some form of service offering would be required.
• Household general waste collections extended to four weekly.

£0

• No service to limited access properties.
• Assisted uplifts could be reduced but the criteria woul need to change prior to implementation, e.g. provision of medical certificates as evidence etc. Legislation would determine that some form of service offering would be required. 

£0

• Glass products will be removed from waste collection with the introduction of the Scottish Deposit Return Scheme in October 2025 supporting the removal of domestic glass collections.
• A requirement would remain for Bring sites for other glass products not captured by the Scottish Deposit Return Scheme.

£0

• No service change.

£0

• A 3% increase would not cover the full cost of a new food waste collection but would contribute to a service of this type at another Argyll location.

£0

• Completely stopping the service would mean that we would not fulfil our statutory obligations so we cannot make this saving.

£0

• Increased litter and debris resulting in blocked/damaged drains, gullies etc. and other infrastructure.
• Increased health and safety risk to the public.

£0

• No service during weekends or public holidays.
• Inability to meet statutory requirements to keep public areas clean.
• Increased reliance on communities to self-deliver on a voluntary basis.

£0

• Reduced resilience across wider service.
• Removes any ability to litter pick on road verges and remove roadkill.
• Removal of summer seasonal employees including evening street sweeping, beach cleaning and litter bin patrols.

£0

• Reduced resilience across wider council services.
• Significant reduction ability to respond to littering, fly tipping and street cleanliness.
• Laybys and road verges unsightly.
• Negative impact on appearance of the area which may lead to less tourism.

£0

• There would be minimal change to the current service.

£0

• The increase would enhance our ability to deliver services covering littering, fly tipping, street cleanliness, cleaning laybys and road verges and servicing litter bins.