• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

Local Government and Communities Committee Wednesday 9 September 2020 Session 5 © Parliamentary copyright. Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body Information on the Scottish Parliament’s copyright policy can be found on the website - www.parliament.scot or by contacting Public Information on 0131 348 5000 Wednesday 9 September 2020 CONTENTS Col. INTERESTS......................................................................................................................................................... 1 DECISION ON TAKING BUSINESS IN PRIVATE ....................................................................................................... 2 COMMUNITY EMPOWERMENT (SCOTLAND) ACT 2015 (PARTS 3 AND 5) (POST-LEGISLATIVE SCRUTINY) ................ 3 SUBORDINATE LEGISLATION............................................................................................................................. 42 Town and Country Planning (Emergency Period and Extended Period) (Coronavirus) (Scotland) Regulations 2020 (SSI 2020/254) ........................................................................................................... 42 LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND COMMUNITIES COMMITTEE 21st Meeting 2020, Session 5 CONVENER *James Dornan (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP) DEPUTY CONVENER *Sarah Boyack (Lothian) (Lab) COMMITTEE MEMBERS *Keith Brown (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP) *Gail Ross (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP) *Alexander Stewart (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) *Annie Wells (Glasgow) (Con) *Andy Wightman (Lothian) (Green) *attended THE FOLLOWING ALSO PARTICIPATED: Mick Doyle (Scottish Community Development Centre) Fiona Garven (Scottish Community Development Centre) Linda Gillespie (Development Trusts Association Scotland) Clementine Hill-O’Connor (University of Strathclyde) Louisa Macdonell (Development Trusts Association Scotland) Carolyn McMillan (Glasgow Caledonian University) Professor Artur Steiner (Glasgow Caledonian University) CLERK TO THE COMMITTEE Peter McGrath LOCATION The David Livingstone Room (CR6) 1 9 SEPTEMBER 2020 2 Scottish Parliament Decision on Taking Business in Private Local Government and Communities Committee 10:01 Wednesday 9 September 2020 The Convener: Today’s main business is an evidence session on the Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act 2015 but first, at [The Convener opened the meeting at 10:00] item 2, we have consideration of whether to take item 5 in private. Item 5 is consideration of that Interests evidence. As some members are meeting remotely, rather than asking whether everyone The Convener (James Dornan): Good agrees, I will instead ask whether anyone objects. morning. I welcome everyone to the 21st meeting If there is silence, I will assume that you are in 2020 of the Local Government and content. Communities Committee. Today, some of us are attending in person in committee room 6 of the I will take that silence as consent. It is agreed Parliament, and some of us are attending remotely that item 5 will be taken in private. by videoconference. Before we begin, I remind everyone that social distancing measures are in place in this room and across the Parliament. Please take care to observe those measures at all times this morning, including during breaks and when the meeting ends. I remind members in the room not to touch microphones or consoles during the meeting, because they will be operated remotely by broadcasting staff. Please ensure that all mobile phones are in silent mode. At item 1, I welcome Gail Ross to the committee. Gail is attending today’s meeting by videoconference. I ask her to indicate whether she has any relevant interests to declare. Gail Ross (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP): Thank you, convener, I am pleased to be able to join you. I have no relevant interests to declare today. 3 9 SEPTEMBER 2020 4 Community Empowerment question. She conducted data collection and can give examples of specific interventions. (Scotland) Act 2015 (Parts 3 and Clementine Hill-O’Connor (University of 5) (Post-legislative Scrutiny) Strathclyde): One of the things to flag about specific examples of the participation requests is that it was agreed that interviews and case studies 10:02 would all be anonymous. There are some The Convener: Item 3 is an evidence session examples that we can talk about specifically, but in on the Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act other cases we offered anonymity to the 2015. participants. Last year, the committee carried out a major There was a lot of information in the annual digital listening exercise, in which we sought views reports, but we had some limitations on the kind of about community wellbeing, what it means to data that is reflected there, and we can talk about people and how it can be grown and sustained. that in a bit more detail later on We had a fantastic response and the committee is We found that it is too early to say how grateful to all who contributed. A key theme to participation requests will impact empowerment, emerge was an appetite for people to feel more but we anticipate that community empowerment empowered in local decision making and more will be a longer-term consequence. We talked involved in the operation of local services and about some of the potential for community amenities. The committee has decided to build on empowerment and some of the different that by looking at two key parts of the 2015 act: understandings of what community empowerment part 3, concerning participation requests; and part means in public service authorities and in 5, concerning asset transfers. We want to assess communities. how successful those have been in advancing community wellbeing in the five years since the act On the question of whether all communities was passed. Today is our first evidence session. have benefited, we analysed what kinds of groups were making participation requests. A lot of The witnesses in our first panel were involved in requests come from community councils, which a recent evaluation of those parts of the act. I raises some questions on the extent that they are welcome our witnesses who are attending fully representative of the diverse communities remotely today. From Glasgow Caledonian that we have in Scotland. That said, just because University we have Professor Artur Steiner, community councils are not diverse does not professor in social entrepreneurship and mean that they do not impact on marginalised community development, and Carolyn McMillan, communities. We saw participation requests from researcher, and from the University of Strathcyde a range of different kinds of communities. we have Clementine Hill-O’Connor, who is a social However, because we did not have a full return of policy research associate. I am grateful to you for the annual reports, quite a lot of data is missing taking time to answer our questions. We will move and we are limited to the broad generalisations straight to questions after I give out some and trends that we can identify at this stage. technical information. The Convener: Do you sense that participation For the benefit of broadcasting, there is a pre- requests have led to better partnerships between arranged order and I will call each member in turn communities and public service bodies? to ask their questions for a block of up to nine minutes. Professor Steiner, perhaps you could Professor Steiner: Participation requests aim take the lead in indicating who on the panel will to create collaboration between public service answer each question, and more than one of you authorities and community groups. In the past, may answer if that is appropriate. Please could collaboration was obviously possible and there everyone give broadcasting staff a second to were less formal means of achieving that. The operate your microphones before you speak. legislation helpfully opens a new and more formal door to systematise attempts to collaborate. I will begin the questions. Could you give us some examples of the participation requests and As we know, community groups can have actions? What impact have they had? For different relationships—sometimes good and example, have they led to more empowered sometimes not—with public service authorities. communities and have all types of community The legislation creates a formal duty for public benefited, including more marginalised service authorities to look at specific requests from communities? a community body, no matter how formally it is established, which is an important component of Professor Artur Steiner (Glasgow the legislation. There is evidence that different Caledonian University): I think that Clementine community groups created good relationships as a Hill-O’Connor is the best person to answer that result of the legislation. Especially when they were 5 9 SEPTEMBER 2020 6 successful, participation requests led to enhanced requests definitely increased from one year to the trust and better collaboration between community next. The data set covered 2017-18 and 2018-19. bodies and public service authorities. Some Again, the data has some limitations, because not community groups decided to go ahead with other all public service authorities submitted annual community projects, including asset transfer. reports, despite the duty on them to do so. There is evidence that the legislation works to the Sarah Boyack (Lothian) (Lab): Welcome to the extent that, if participation requests are successful, witnesses. The evidence that you have presented there is an opportunity to rebuild or develop to us has been very useful. collaboration between

Load more

  28

Copy Link