Stirling Council has published the findings of its 2026/27 ‘Big Conversation’ consultation with over 2,600 residents, council staff, and local stakeholders.
The consultation asked locals for their opinions on income-raising and cost-saving options for the council, while it navigates a projected £14.3 million budget shortfall for 2026/27.
So how were the different measures received?
Income-raising measures
Most broadly supported were changes to housing licensing rules so that landlords pay certain fees rather than the council. Respondents were clear that any rule-changes must come alongside improved standards and compliance, and any extra costs should not be passed on to lower-income tenants and students.
Meanwhile, increases to parking charges were largely divided as respondents worried about the impact on hospitality, retail, and independent businesses in the city centre. Some suggested that any parking charge increases should accompany improvements to public transport, particularly on evenings and Sundays.
Some respondents supported increased parking charges on environmental grounds, and many proposed a graded pricing structure, with cheaper-than-current charges for shorter parking periods, to encourage a higher turnover of spaces.
Increases to burial costs and nursery fees for non-statutory childcare were also largely opposed as they would be more impactful for lower-income households, with a low pay-off for the council in the meantime.
A further increase in the garden waste permit from £52 to £60 was overwhelmingly opposed by respondents, who felt it had already risen sharply from £35 in recent years, and constitutes a form of ‘double tax’, as it is charged on top of council tax.
Cost-saving measures
Slashing or reforming clothing grants for school uniforms was the most widely accepted cost-saving measure, although only 55 per cent of respondents supported it. Many respondents supported reducing the overall cost uniforms to allow the grants to be removed.
Some comments also recommended reforming the grants to use retailer-specific vouchers, rather than cash, to avoid the money being used for other purposes.
Cuts to bus services, such as the Sunday X10 and Saturday S60 service, were overwhelmingly opposed, due to the disproportionate impact it would have on lower-income, rural, and elderly residents.
Reductions in youth participation, educational psychology services, and extra educational provisions, also saw overwhelming opposition, as respondents sought to avoid exclusionary outcomes.
Boosting the efficiency of existing services
Changes to the delivery of existing services to save costs was more palatable to respondents than cuts.
The most widely supported measure was a review of smaller schools and the sharing of headteachers across sites. While this was largely supported in principle, respondents were keen to see that unintended consequences did not harm student outcomes and senior leadership decision-making, particularly in rural areas.
School transport, such as the use of taxis, was a dividing issue. Respondents accepted that, as covered in the national media, the use of taxis for schoolchildren presents a high cost for local councils across the UK, although respondents were hesitant around a proposal to increase the statutory walking distance from two to three miles for children over eight.
Another divisive measure was the dimming of streetlights. In the wake of Stirling’s Reclaim the Night marches, many respondents cited concerns about the safety of women and girls, the elderly, and those working unsociable hours. On large, though, 67 per cent support of respondents supported it, citing improved efficiency and reduced light-pollution.
The proposal to outsource school meals for nursery and primary schoolchildren received widespread scepticism, as respondents suggested that profit-motivated private providers would reduce the quality of ingredients, the size of portions, and the variety of menus.
While the council suggested that this could save £500,000, it would come with a loss of 43 jobs, which could increase long-term welfare costs. Respondents were also sceptical of the savings figure, suggesting that adequate meal provision would not be possible for £500,000 cheaper.
What next?
Stirling Council’s 2026/27 budget was set during a council meeting on Thursday, February 26. See our online coverage of this at www.brignews.com
Featured Image Credit: Brig Newspaper
Politics Editor
Journalism and Politics 4th Year
Stockport
