Democracy Matters steering group: minutes - March 2025

Attendees and apologies

• Katie Kelly, Chair, New Local
• Elizabeth Docherty Director, Scottish Community Alliance
• James Henderson, Local Democracy and Participation Academic
• Jennifer Kerr, Community Engagement manager, South Lanarkshire Council

• Jacqui Greenless, Community Planning Manager, North Ayrshire Council (online)
• Lee Haxton, Community Planning Team Leader, Perth & Kinross Council (online)
• Paul Vaughan, Hea of Communities and Neighbourhoods, Fife Council
• Pauline Smith, Chief Executive, Development Trust Association Scotland
• Tanveer Parnez, Director of National Development, Black and Ethnic Minority Infrastructure Scotland
• Karen Wiley, Policy and Participation Manager, Glasgow Disability Alliance (substitute for Tressa Burke)
• Willie Sullivan, Director, Electoral Reform Society Scotland
• Laura MacDonald, Development Manager, Scotland Community Development Centre (online)
• Mick Doyle, Head of Programme, Scotland Community Development Centre
• Susan Paxton, Director, Scotland Community Development Centre (online)
• David Barr, Democratic Governance Manager, Improvement Service

Official support

• Julie McLachlan, Scottish Government, Place Based Service Change
• Cameron Mellowes, Scottish Government, Local Governance Review
• Ryan Little, Scottish Government, Local Governance Review
• Christopher Robb, Scottish Government, Local Governance Review
• Kathleen Glazik, Scottish Government, Community Empowerment
• Joe Dickson, Scottish Government, Community Empowerment
• Simon Cameron, COSLA Chief Officer, Corporate Policy Team 
• Brianna Fletcher, COSLA Policy Officer

Apologies

• Anna Baxendale, Head of Health Improvement, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde
• Douglas Hendry, Executive Director, Argyll & Bute Council
• Rona Blackwood, Head of Programmes, Children’s Parliament
• Olivia Brown, MSYP for Midlothian North and Musselburgh
• Tressa Burke, Chief Executive, Glasgow Disability Alliance
• Skye Allan MSYP for Dumfriesshire

Items and actions

Welcome and introduction by chair

Katie Kelly opened the session by welcoming members, outlining the importance of this work to the wider Public Service Reform agenda and how it could underpin public sector transformation.

Democracy Matters background and officials update

Officials presented a recap of the last session noting the key aspects the group felt were important to any new decision making model including the importance of democratic legitimacy with the whole community, the need to rationalise the existing governance landscape, and any new approach to decision making needing to empower what’s currently working well locally.

Officials also outlined a new model framework based on feedback from the last session with a focus on ‘community anchor networks’ requiring different local organisations to work together to set up a new community decision making body.

Summary of group discussion and key points 

The group then spent the majority of the session in three breakout groups where they discussed and developed proposals to address the following topics:

• Integration into the Current Decision-Making Landscape
• Funding and Finance
• Participation and Governance

The groups then fed back the key points from their work as part of a whole room discussion.

Participation and governance key points

• All natural communities in Scotland should have the right to develop a Community Action Plan and resources should be made available from the Public Sector to enable this
• Community Action Plans should be developed first and then resourcing should be explored, as starting with funding can limit aspirations. It was noted that Community Action Plans should be meaningful, respond directly to the needs of the community and in turn must be considered within public authorities strategic planning
• The group noted that the current reliance on volunteers leads to many community bodies being dominated by retired professionals, that often do not reflect the community. Proposals to mitigate this included reimbursement of time/travel and a focus on capacity-building at the local level
• It was agreed that any participatory mechanisms introduced must engage hard to reach individuals and groups within communities, considering the PANEL principles to ensure a human rights-based approach (participation, accountability, non-discrimination, empowerment and legality)  
• It was suggested that the use of participatory budgeting could be one mechanism to create shared accountability and consensus on spend which could be financed through mainstreaming budget allocation
• Group members discussed the possible role that referenda could play within a future community decision making system, recognising that they can be an expensive instrument at the local level and can have the potential to be divisive as well as build consensus 
• The group felt that there should be further discussion on what demonstrable measures of engagement could be developed that could lead to the adoption of community action plans
• It was noted that the spatial and Community Action Planning could be combined and made a statutory requirement for public bodies. This recognises that who makes a community action plan and who delivers on its aims may be different, however community action planning must be considered within higher governance levels (including within public bodies, Local Authorities and National Government)

Integration into the current decision-making landscape key points

• It was noted by this group that CAPs should hold a statutory function, rather than there be a statutory duty on a community or CPP to ensure there are plans in every community

• It was agreed that if a community is already utilising a plan such as a locality, local place, or climate plan, the addition of a further suite of planning exercises may be burdensome. This must be balanced alongside the needs of communities who require further support to enable plan development

• It was noted that Community Learning and Development requires a much stronger footing than it currently has in communities. Engaging face to face with communities is well established as the best way to understand a community’s issues but the capacity of local authorities and anchor organisations deliver this is not in place

• There were concerns expressed about the current scope and range of plans within the community space and how this is already a cluttered environment, and Democracy Matters must rationalise and simplify this if it is to have a lasting impact

• Good capacity building should be prioritised in public agencies through whatever method is available, so that communities are able to realise the potential of additional powers and responsibilities

• It was noted that ensuring buy-in and understanding from elected members is essential for any long-term and meaningful community empowerment

• Finally it was cautioned that there is a significant issue relating to the variation in scope and quality of existing community action plans across Scotland, this will require further discussion

Funding and finance key points

• This group stated that the key financial role of the community body should be to spend; with local government spending and dispensing and national government more focused on the dispensing of funding
• It was suggested that core funding should not be distributed equally between community decision-making and instead be subject to a funding formula which takes the community’s SIMD, population size and wider demographics into account
• It was agreed that the system of community funding and grant giving should be streamlined noting funding is currently siloed with too many reporting requirements and more local democratic governance should be the vehicle for doing this. Thoughts varied on whether the focus for this should be on:
• mapping and diverting existing grants that are received by place-based community organisations into decision making bodies
• aiming for a percentage of the whole public sector budget to be delegated to community level
• Or the body being set up with the capacity to apply for grants from the above sources

 

Additional Funding Streams

• Beyond the funding from the public and third sectors, the following funding streams were identified:
• Community Benefit Funding
• Direct Taxation
• Income generation
• Procurement
• Community Shares
• Philanthropy

 

• It was proposed that there should be protections in place for community bodies, but these shouldn’t be developed in a way that encourages risk adverse decision-making or prohibits creative thinking

Next steps

The session concluded with officials confirming that the upcoming April session will be in-person with the Minister for Public Finance and the COSLA Vice President and be an opportunity to discuss ideas developed today with them.

Officials also noted that they will bring together the key points from the session which will be used as a springboard for model development in the April session.