Bridging the Social Care Implementation Gap: Councillor Paul Kelly’s Remarks at The Gathering
SCVO’s The Gathering event took place earlier this month, with organisations across Scotland joining to take part in various talks, workshops, and discussions to showcase the brilliant work going on and learn from each other.
During the two-day event, MCA staff took part in a variety of workshops, one of which was ‘Mind the (implementation) gap: overcoming obstacles and sharing solutions to strengthen social care’. Hosted by the Coalition of Care and Support Providers in Scotland (CCSP), this session gathered a panel of academics, politicians, and social care staff to share examples of solutions and discuss how to break the cycle of implementation failure in social care.
Strong local examples of work in Midlothian show that integration, prevention, and person-centred care work well when partnerships are adequately supported. However, insufficient funding and overstretched staff threaten the core elements that make social care fully effective, widening the gap between national ambition and on-the-ground delivery.
One of the panel members, Councillor Paul Kelly, COSLA Spokesperson for Health & Social Care, started the session with opening remarks that MCA would like to share. We believe Councillor Kelly’s remarks resonate locally, emphasising the need for genuine parity across health, social care, local government, and the voluntary sector; and for that parity to be reflected in funding decisions, governance structures, and our partnerships.
“Good morning, everyone. It’s a privilege to join you today, and I want to begin by recognising the extraordinary work carried out by the people and organisations represented in this room. Whether you are supporting individuals directly, building resilient communities, or sustaining vital services, your contribution is central to the wellbeing of people across Scotland. Social care, and indeed Local Government, continues to rely on the commitment and compassion of those on the ground, and I want to thank you for everything you do—often in very challenging circumstances.
The theme of today’s discussion—minding the implementation gap—is one that will feel very familiar to many of you. In my roles as a Councillor and as COSLA’s Health and Social Care Spokesperson, I see every day the distance that can open up between national ambition and local reality. And I see the enormous pressure this places on the people who are trying their best to deliver support that is personalised, accessible, and rooted in dignity.
A major contributor to that gap is the sustained and damaging pressure on local government funding. Year after year, councils have faced cuts that outpace wider public sector settlements. The result is unavoidable: reduced capacity, harder choices, and genuine risks to the stability of the very services—social care, community supports, prevention, early intervention—that national policy relies on.
And of course, these pressures do not end with councils. Our voluntary and community organisations, who provide some of the most trusted, flexible and relational forms of support, feel the impact just as acutely. When local government budgets are squeezed, it often reverberates across commissioned and grant‑funded services. Organisations that communities depend on are left managing uncertainty, insecure funding cycles and rising demand—all while being asked to deliver more, earlier, and for people with increasingly complex needs.
So when we discuss the implementation gap, we must recognise that it is not caused by a lack of vision, commitment, or agreement. More often, it is the consequence of a system that is under-resourced at the very levels where delivery happens.
And this leads me to a broader point that I believe must underpin the reforms ahead: Scotland needs national government to properly reflect a true parity of esteem between health, social care, local government and our voluntary sector. We say often that social care should be valued equally to health; we say that community and preventative work is just as critical as acute care. But that parity must show up in funding decisions, in governance structures, in national conversations, and in the tone and trust that characterise our partnerships. Without that, the implementation gap will only widen. COSLA has consistently argued for greater and more sustainable funding to Local Government so that Councils can drive forward this work as anchors within their communities, in close and equal partnership with voluntary and community organisations.
In spite of all of this, we continue to see strong examples of what can be achieved when local partnerships are properly supported. Integrated teams working to keep people well at home. Community organisations preventing crisis through early support. Multidisciplinary approaches to complex care. These successes show that the direction of travel is right—they remind us that integration, prevention and person‑centred practice are not abstract ambitions; they are happening, here and now, when conditions allow.
However, they also remind us of what is at stake. Because when funding is insufficient, when staff are stretched to their limits, and when organisational partners are expected to absorb pressures without the resources to do so, we lose the very things that make social care effective: relationship‑based practice, continuity, early intervention, and time.
The Care Reform Act, passed last year, brings with it opportunities to strengthen rights and enhance people’s experience of care. But if we are serious about turning those legislative commitments into lived reality, then we must be just as serious about ensuring the capacity to deliver them. Councils and Health and Social Care Partnerships will be central to implementation, and the voluntary sector will continue to be a key partner in providing flexible and preventative support. A national vision is important—but it must be matched with investment, local flexibility and local trust.
So as we begin our discussion today, I would offer this: bridging the implementation requires national government, local government, health partners and the voluntary sector to work as genuine equals, with shared accountability and shared investment. And it requires us to protect the services—particularly community‑based and preventative ones—that give people control, choice and dignity.”
END.
