Open Government Partnership Steering Group minutes: March 2025

Attendees and apologies

Co-chairs

• Jamie Hepburn, Minister for Parliamentary Business (apologies)
• Juliet Swann, Transparency International UK (Chair)

COSLA

• Simon Cameron, Chief Officer - Workforce and Corporate Policy Team, COSLA
• Councillor Steven Heddle, COSLA Vice Chair
• Robyn Todd, Policy Assistant – Corporate Policy Team 

Civil Society

• Annie Cook, Deciding Matters
• Jack Gilmore, Open Data Scotland
• Pauline Gordon, GCVS
• Sam Jordan, SCDC
• Lucy McTernan, OGP Civil Society Steering Committee
• Adam Milne, Carnegie UK
• Innes Morgan, Act with Purpose
• Sheghley Ogilvie, SCVO
• Susan Paxton, Scottish Community Development Centre
• David Reilly, Poverty Alliance
• Alex Stobart, Mydex CIC
• Alice Telfer, ICAS

Scottish Government

• Jennie Barugh, Director of Performance and Strategic Outcomes
• Andy Bruce, Director of Communications and Ministerial Support (apologies)
• Lorna Gibb, Deputy Director, Improving Public Engagement Division 
• Doreen Grove, Head of Open Government
• Martin Macfie, Head of Open Data,
• Richard Foggo, Director of Health and Social Care Finance and Governance (Rachel Dowle, Head of Strategic Design deputising, deputising)
• Eilidh McLaughlin, Deputy Director for Digital, Ethics, Inclusion and Assurance
• Louise Meikleham, Senior Data Policy Officer
• Catriona Laing, Deputy Director Climate Change (Helen Rule, Team Leader - Public Engagement, Domestic Climate Change, deputising)
• Jill Morton, Evidence and Reporting Team Lead, National Performance Framework

Local government

• Ann-Marie Bruce, Strategic Development Office, Aberdeenshire Council
• Ruth Lea, Occupational Therapy Lead, Orkney Islands

Scottish Information Commissioner

• David Hamilton, Scottish Information Commissioner 

Secretariat

• Finlay McCartney, Open Government, Scottish Government

• Neisha Kirk, Open Government, Scottish Government
• Amy Watson, Open Government, Scottish Government

Items and actions

Welcome and apologies

Doreen Grove and Juliet Swann noted the urgent apologies from the Minister for Parliamentary Business. Attendees were made aware that consideration had been given to the governance arrangements for the meeting in the absence of the Minister. It was confirmed that there was agreement that the session could continue on the basis that it was not a decision making meeting.

The workshop began with a presentation shared by Juliet Swann. The presentation covered the purpose of the session, why the meeting had been extended to other government and civil society representatives involved in open government work, and a brief summary of the current context in Scotland for attendees unfamiliar with the work of the OG Steering Group.

The aim for the session was to bring together everyone involved in the development and delivery of the current Open Government Action Plan into an initial conversation around a Trust and Transparency Strategy for Scotland.

Juliet closed by noting the recent IRM future look workshop highlighted the importance of going back to core principles in Scotland for open government. This would involve considering how open government intersects with other areas and strategies, and how it can be enabled to be seen as adding clear value.

As the group start to consider how these core principles can be applied, Juliet highlighted getting a shared understanding of what a cross open government strategy centred on trust and transparency might achieve would be important.

Summary of discussion (first half)

Trust was considered fundamentally dependant upon delivering on the needs of the population. This involves how government defines priorities, communicates the life cycle of delivery for the public, how government involves the public and can demonstrate accountability.

It was also reflected that as trust and transparency are issues of political inequality, they are issues driven from social inequality.

A significant theme raised throughout the discussion was the theme of mapping the decision making journey for the public to support the rationale and working that goes into government decisions.

Post decision accountability and an openness about whether the policy decision resulted in the impact intended was raised during the discussion. It was questioned whether government was able to establish an audit throughout the process.

The groups also explored the importance and investment needed in relationship building, more robust, accountable and participatory methods of engagement, management of the public’s expectations and processes for better transparency.

The discussions also covered:

• the need for a clear narrative, to tackle unapproachable language so to avoid public confusion or speculation, and to improve support for reliable and trusted community partners to help government to reach people ‘where they are at’
• co-production and co-design as having the potential to bring people in at an early stage, and to help facilitate potentially difficult conversations or to better explain any trade offs, changes in policy or timescales that government may be contending with to help tackle public mistrust and distrust
• the importance of understanding the risk of not engaging with people, and striking the balance of getting the amount of engagement right
• it was considered whether participation with the public should involve acknowledging government does not have all the answers and clearly outlining any ‘red lines’ to the public. Explaining why things are not on the table was a level of transparency that was seen to have value, but was currently not considered to be happening consistently across government. The inconsistency was noted as having a big effect on the bigger trust picture
• The government consultation process was noted as effective to provide input from stakeholders but its ability to reach the public was considered rare. Decisions as part of this process could be seen in some cases to have already been taken in some cases
• Examples of better practice was Scottish Government’s response to COVID-19 and participatory budgeting (PB). It was noted government was being transparent by providing daily updates and being prepared to explain the decisions to the public. There was a sense government was ‘working out loud’ with political consensus behind it. PB was described as a strategy where you are able to show the workings behind a decision whilst empowering people to make those decisions

It was noted Scottish Government do report on consultation feedback with a section titled ‘you said, we did’ on the government consultation platform, Citizens Space. However it was acknowledged that respondents could feel like their views haven’t been replicated in final decisions, which can inspire distrust.

Summary of discussion (second half)

The group found the following important to consider when discussing the objectives for Trust and Transparency in Scotland for the next period (2025 to 2029):

• To have a clear and transparent way of listening openly and acting on people's voices
• A focus on actions or action words – you have, or we will do – to provide members of the public with a better sense of what is being achieved
• A commitment to how these objectives are included in structures of decision-making for there to be accountability at different levels
• A commitment to feedback on how listening carried out by government has been taken on board, in recognition of the time and effort put in by participants
• To build engagement on services and decisions into governance and accountability structures
• A commitment to speaking to people behind the data, being honest with participants and providing a safe space for voices to be shared. This is likely to involve working closely with trusted community organisations and an acknowledgement that not everything may be resolved
• An objective specifically around tackling mis/dis-information may be required

• A need for objectives to be explicit in there intentions to include all ages and demographics
• An overarching theme about demonstrating that government is ‘walking the walk’ on any trust and transparency initiatives, and making sure these are linked to wellbeing

• High quality, proactive, consistent information and reporting that is publicly available, easily accessible and understandable
• Communicating principles and direction of travel to outline how decisions could be made 
• Gaining momentum in terms of identifying areas and addressing problems by getting different departments to move in the same direction on trust and transparency
• To consider the structural way we implement these, as well as cultural. How do we incentivise these behaviours within these frameworks?
• The importance of embedding these principles across the civil service and having top level support to enable this
• Increasing people’s voice and choice on decisions that will affect their lives. Communicating there are limitations about where that is best used and applied 

One participant noted the slow nature of addressing issues of trust and transparency, and warned against too much time being spent on objectives. It was instead advocated that there is a need for government to start now, and publish more information for the public.

One participant noted that a strategy will need to build on existing standards, or create standards that are bespoke to the open government agenda. Doreen Grove confirmed that Scottish Government would explore working with the OECD to build in their open government standards.

COSLA reflections

Councillor Heddle was invited by the Chair to share any reflections from a local government perspective.

Councillor Heddle noted that many areas resonated, and that the themes covered were applicable to all spheres of government.

The need to make the language of open government more accessible was mentioned as a useful area to tackle, and that COSLA supported the move to use the language of trust and transparency as helpful.

It was noted that discussions around bringing people on the journey early was important to manage expectations. Outlining the principles we hold as government as whole, what may result, when it might happen, as well as why it may not happen, were outlined as key to building trust.

Councillor Heddle noted in particular the comment shared by David Reilly on political inequality, and that it was telling that a lack of trust can be derived directly from a lack of involvement.

Councillor Heddle closed by urging that as part of this work we need to remind people that democracy starts with them.

Conclusion and next steps

The Chair thanked attendees for their time and insights shared. Some broad, key themes that emerged from the session were noted as:

• Relationships
• Evaluation of impact and accountability through monitoring
• Improved communications and journey mapping
• Continuity and consistency across government
• Political inequality and the need for a more participative democracy
• Honesty and support from top level officials
• Better profiling of open government and making more of its structures
• Quality and understandability of published information

Attendees were encouraged to think about how the group may want to build on this discussion, and to share any further thoughts from the meeting with Juliet Swann and Doreen Grove.

The provisional date for the next meeting is Thursday 19 June, 14:00 to 15:00. Any non members wishing to attend a meeting as observers should contact the secretariat (opengovernment@gov.scot).