A decision not to supply extra funding for Stirling and Clackmannanshire’s joint health and social care partnership has been defended by Clacks Council.
Last week, The Courier reported that a cash crisis within the two local authorities’ Integration Joint Board (IJB) has caused a stand-off.
Stirling Council met on May 1 to discuss whether or not it should provide an additional £1.973 million to keep the IJB afloat.
The partnership, which also involves NHS Forth Valley, is projected to overspend by £7.892m during the 2025-26 financial year.
In March, Clackmannanshire Council decided it would not contribute anything more towards this deficit.
Concerns were raised by Stirling Council last week about the possibility of vital health and social care services being affected for both Stirling and Clackmannanshire residents.
There were also worries about Stirling taxpayers ultimately footing the bill for Clacks locals.
But Clackmannanshire Council says it remains committed to the partnership with Stirling Council, even as Stirling is reportedly considering withdrawing from the IJB.
And Clacks Council argues the situation is not as simple as the local authority simply declining to contribute.
‘This sort of request has never been made before’
A council spokesperson told The Courier: “To be clear – we did not refuse to pay.
“Options were considered relative to key financial risks and the further contribution requested is not affordable.”
They added: “This sort of request has never been made before.
“Our only option was to consider the request relative to the reserves held by the Council.”
Clacks Council argues the request for extra funding “disproportionately” impacts Clackmannanshire, “as the additional sums have been proposed on a cash basis rather than proportionate to the budget.”
The local authority says that if a “similar proportionate request” had been made to the other IJB partners, Stirling Council would have been asked to pay an additional £9.2m-£13.8m, and NHS Forth Valley £24.73m-£37.09m.
“This reflects the scale and significance of the cash sum requested,” the spokesperson said.
Clacks has shouldered financial burden in the past, says council
A Stirling Council document laying out the situation for councillors said: “There is a risk that any recovery plan that the IJB develops to meet any remaining financial gap could be applied across Clackmannanshire and Stirling services, resulting in the services Stirling citizens receive being negatively impacted, despite Stirling Council having made decisions to provide additional funding to cover the shortfall to the IJB budget.”
Clackmannanshire Council argues that “contributions made by partners should ‘lose their identity’ when consolidated within the integrated budget.”
Addressing the claim that Stirling Council will fund health and social care services for Clackmannanshire residents, the Clacks Council spokesperson said: “We could have made the same claim, for instance, in 2019-20 when we provided additional financial support while other partners delivered a financial deficit.”
Council leader says Clacks has not ‘failed’ on care
Clackmannanshire Council leader Ellen Forson said: “I want to be absolutely clear that Clackmannanshire Council remains fully committed to the Clackmannanshire and Stirling Health and Social Care Partnership, and to the vital services it provides for our communities.
“It is deeply regrettable that Stirling Council is considering withdrawing from a partnership that has stood for nearly a decade.
“Such a move risks undermining the collaboration and progress we have achieved together.
“Last month, I wrote to the Integration Joint Board to set out our concerns and provide clarity on Clackmannanshire’s position.
“It is disappointing to learn that this correspondence has not been shared with all board members.
“I firmly reject any suggestion that Clackmannanshire Council has failed to prioritise health and social care.
“Since the IJB’s inception, our annual contribution has increased by 98% – a clear and sustained demonstration of our commitment to this critical area of public service.
“This situation has arisen because the IJB’s current Strategic Commissioning Plan is not financially sustainable.
“Like every local authority, we must ensure that our plans are deliverable within available resources – and we expect the same level of scrutiny and realism from our partners.”
Stirling Council did not respond to a request for comment.
For more Stirling news and features visit our page or join us on Facebook
Conversation