Official Report 253KB pdf
Good morning and welcome to the Equal Opportunities Committee's third meeting of 2004. We have received apologies from Margaret Smith, Marilyn Livingstone and Frances Curran.
I will introduce the organisation that I represent and its remit. The Scottish Civic Forum seeks to help organisations and individuals to engage in democratic processes. Our work includes acting as a neutral convener in discussions on Government policy. The organisation avoids taking positions on specific issues, such as proportional representation, to maintain its neutrality. However, we gathered opinion on local government reform during 2001 and 2002. We held two events to discuss the white paper "Renewing Local Democracy: The Next Steps" and an event on changing the faces of our councils. The comments that I will make today are based on the responses that we received from civic groups and individuals who attended those events, which were held in Aberdeen, Oban and Stirling.
May I interrupt you? Because we want to pursue a particular line of questioning, it is less than helpful for you to go through the outcome of your discussions. It would be helpful if you could apply yourself to the question. I know that the issue is wide and tempting, but my colleagues will ask you questions on particular issues later, so perhaps you can return to your comments then.
Yes. On balance, from the material that I have gone through so far, people are in favour of the change and they see it as a positive move to increase participation.
Thank you. Would the witnesses from the Scottish Youth Parliament like to respond?
Good morning, first of all.
Good morning.
I will make some comments in a similar vein, although I do not want to take forever. The Scottish Youth Parliament, for those members who are unaware of it, is an apolitical organisation, although it seeks to change the policies of Government and other decision makers. One of its other aims is to widen participation among young people, along the lines of the active citizenship agenda, which is one of the Government's buzzwords of the moment.
My first question is to the witnesses from the Scottish Civic Forum. In your written submission, you say that the participants at the Aberdeen meeting thought that an advantage of STV is
From the reports that we received, we think that one advantage of a PR system is that it could inspire political parties to field more candidates in each ward. Given local levels of party membership, that could widen out opportunities for election to a greater cross-section of the community. We did not receive much comment on this area, but there was a feeling that first-past-the-post systems favour political parties and that a PR system would open up the system to more independent candidates.
Does the Scottish Youth Parliament have a comment on that?
I echo what was said by the Scottish Civic Forum about the current system favouring political parties. As I am sure you are aware, young people are known for their strong beliefs on single issues. They have a real disinterest in the system of party politics, in which it often seems as though people argue for the sake of argument. Evidence from the Scottish Parliament, particularly the growth of the smaller parties—although they are still parties—and the fact that independents sit in the nationally elected Parliament, makes young people feel that they have more of an option to participate in the process. Were we to see such representation at a lower level, that could only be of benefit to all people in the community, and to young people in particular.
So you think that proportional representation might lead to more young people coming forward.
I think so, but that is not the reason why we want a PR system to be introduced. We want, in particular, the voting age to be lowered to 16, because it is discriminatory not to allow 16-year-olds to vote. A secondary impact is that the system would address concerns about democratic deficit and voter apathy.
Does the Scottish Civic Forum have any comments on lowering the voting age from 18 to 16?
I do not think that we do. We have received no comments from any groups in our consultation to report back on that matter.
I return to the Scottish Youth Parliament witnesses. What feedback have you had from the people whom you have consulted? Is the consensus that they would like the voting age to be lowered? I have been involved with different groups, and there has been a fairly mixed response from young people on whether they want the voting age to be reduced from 18 to 16.
There has been a mixed response. Lowering the voting age from 18 to 16 is one of our founding principles. When the Parliament has voted on that, it has supported lowering the voting age. I am sure that you have heard all the arguments for lowering the voting age. Youth Parliament members firmly believe in those arguments. They do not believe that there should be taxation without representation. Votes on that issue were positive, thus lowering the voting age was included in our manifesto "Getting the Message Right", as Steven Kidd said.
Shiona Baird has a small question.
I hope that it is not too loaded. You have all indicated that you wish to widen representation and diversity on councils, so if the form of PR that is chosen does not do that, I assume that you will not be happy.
Of course not. The Scottish Civic Forum's view, and the view of the forum on discrimination, which I am working on, is that to introduce another voting system or form of PR alone is not enough. A lot of work has to be done to change attitudes among the general public, perhaps especially among younger people and other under-represented groups, such as ethnic minorities, disabled people and people from different backgrounds. A PR system would probably enhance diversity within councils, but it will not be enough on its own. We cannot expect that things will change overnight, just like that. Substantial groundwork needs to be done to educate people and to create a healthy curiosity and a natural interest in politics, and local government in particular, so that people will start to consider standing for election. That interest needs to be nurtured carefully and specifically.
Yes. It was excellent.
We cannot just think about PR as the only way forward; we have to widen the scope and admit that the issue is much bigger.
I want to go back a little. I jumped on what you said about your campaign for votes at age 16. The bill contains proposals to lower the age qualification for council candidates from 21 to 18. Is that measure likely to have an impact on young people standing for election to councils?
I will answer both Shiona Baird and Nanette Milne's questions. In our manifesto, alongside our commitments to PR in local government and to lowering the voting age, we spoke about citizenship education in schools, which would allow young people to take part in the electoral procedure with knowledge of the political process and the political parties. The two questions go hand in hand. The Scottish Parliament has succeeded in being more approachable for people, including young people, and I hope that it will continue to do so. In order for us to introduce voting for young people, they need to be educated about politics as part of the school curriculum. That would allow for further engagement of young people and would allow them to stand for election at 18.
One of our partner organisations, YouthLink Scotland, recently published the results of a survey called "Being Young in Scotland", in which it consulted a number of young people throughout the country. One of the things that I found interesting, but not terribly surprising, was that voting is not seen among young people as a particularly important way to affect one's life. Young people thought that volunteering was more important in that regard, because with volunteering they could see an immediate and definite benefit to their community; with voting, it takes some time for parties to follow up—if they ever do so—what they said prior to the election.
I feel very strongly that the Labour Party's support for 50:50 representation has meant that we have managed to have more women in the Scottish Parliament. Other parties have done the same thing in different ways. That has made a considerable impact on the work of the Parliament. Do you think that, if more young people were engaged in local government and the Scottish Parliament, that would have an impact on policy and the way in which government works?
There would be a noticeable difference. It is important that people are able to start political activity at a younger age. I understand that there is a necessary process—in political parties, people do not start at the top. It takes people time to get near the top and to have significant influence even in the party to which they belong. Any move to allow people to start the process earlier will mean that there are younger candidates. This country has a significant youth population, but there are no members of the Scottish Parliament under 25. I understand why that is the case. I do not agree with it, but we must examine realistic ways of ensuring that people are given the opportunity to participate. I am not saying that we will suddenly end up with a chamber half full of young people.
The Scottish Civic Forum recognises education for citizenship as a key component of efforts to increase engagement, to reach out to different groups and to get people involved in political processes. There is also a lifelong learning need.
As the committee reporter on gender, I want to ask specifically about women's representation. I declare an interest as a member of the Transport and General Workers Union. Respondents to the Executive's consultation on the draft bill, such as the TGWU, have suggested that there should be two-member wards and a requirement for one female and one male to be elected in each. In considering the question of gender balance, do you support the proposition that the representatives who are elected in a multimember ward should be gender balanced? For example, the rules might state that at least one woman should be elected in a three-member ward and at least two women should be elected in a four-member ward. Do you have a view on that issue?
This is one issue on which I cannot express an opinion on behalf of the Scottish Civic Forum. The forum is very supportive of 50:50 campaigns and of equal representation for all under-represented groups in society. However, there is not an organisational position on the mechanisms for achieving that.
When it comes to party politics, should the issue be left to the parties? I am not sure how the rules would apply to independent members.
If in the future we engage with the issue and examine which mechanisms would work best, we will examine their effectiveness in terms of governance.
The Scottish Youth Parliament has not discussed this topic specifically, although, like the Scottish Civic Forum, we can say that we are committed to equality. A number of general concerns have been expressed. The Parliament has not made a clear statement about what are seen as positive discrimination measures. It is not clear whether it supports those measures or whether it believes that other measures should be taken to ensure that everyone has equality of opportunity—that there is equality from the beginning and that set standards do not need to be put in place.
Certainly, when my Scottish Youth Parliament committee—the equal opportunities committee—spoke about the issue, we were not in favour of positive discrimination in the form that has been described, because we believe that it would undermine the democratic process. Candidates should be elected for their ability rather than because of their gender. The Scottish Youth Parliament and its equal opportunities committee have never expressed support for positive discrimination.
Part of the problem with that view arises from the split between ability and the position of men and women in society. However, that leads me nicely to my next point.
In my recollection, remuneration was not a priority for the groups that we talked to during the three meetings that we held. I do not think that people regarded better remuneration as the carrot that would bring them in, although mention was made of widening access by having provisions such as care costs. To enable people to get involved, aspects such as travel and care costs must be considered, particularly for rural areas, in which people can travel long distances to attend meetings.
On Elaine Smith's question and the point about positive action, what is important is removing the barriers that prevent women from standing in local elections. I concur with the Scottish Civic Forum's view that we should consider aspects such as child care. Rather than putting systems in place in political parties or legislating to promote the selection of female candidates, the Scottish Parliament and society must tackle the barriers that prevent women from engaging in politics in general.
My opinion would be that we need all of that, but we are not here to listen to my opinion; we are here to listen to what you have to say about the bill. On child care arrangements, are you thinking along the lines of having vouchers to assist with everyday child care but complementing that with crèches, for example, for particular meetings? Should all local authorities consider such provision?
Any measure that can be put in place to ensure that women with children are able to engage in politics should be explored and provided if possible. We need to remove barriers that are preventing not only women but all sections of society from becoming involved in politics. If there is funding—which is always the big issue—appropriate measures should be implemented.
As an addendum, I point out that more than 50 per cent of members of the Scottish Youth Parliament are women, although we have nothing in place that requires that to be the case. We have no measures or positive action policies to ensure the equal representation of any group in society, but we meet, and in most cases exceed, the proportional targets for minority groups such as minority ethnic groups, disabled people and females.
How do you reckon that you achieve that?
I have absolutely no idea, unfortunately. It has just happened that way. Perhaps it is because, as young people, we have not been influenced as much by the barriers that society puts in place as older people have. Young people choose a candidate because they think that they are the right young person, not because that person has been allowed by society to have several years of experience at that level.
It is important not to fall into the trap of thinking that financial incentives alone should solve the whole problem. I do not think that someone will wish to stand for election as a councillor simply because they will get such and such a sum of money paid to them each year. However, that will make being a councillor more possible for a lot of people and will therefore cause them to consider it.
You might have made your position on this point clear already, but you might want to add something else. The Scottish Executive has established a councillors remuneration progress group that will examine remuneration for councillors, such as their salary, and their role and the time commitment involved. That is quite a wide remit. Given that you realise that a lot more factors than those are important, which should the group consider in order to encourage more diversity? What might be done to support the participation of young people?
With regard to the suggestion that the age at which people can stand for election to councils could be lowered, the problem is that a lot of young people who would become eligible would still be engaged in education and, regardless of which other measures are put in place, there is only a certain amount of time that it is possible for them to take off from university. That factor must be taken into account, but I cannot provide you with a solution.
Taking that into consideration, it surprises me that you do not think that remuneration is an important factor for young people.
Remuneration is certainly an important factor. However, there needs to be some acknowledgement that most young people would be studying during that time. If young people were elected as councillors—and, I hope, continued to be elected as councillors—when would such involvement become a career? That is where remuneration becomes important. We must ensure that anyone who is elected at that age and cannot study during that time has something that they can fall back on.
Have you considered the fact that some councillors are part time? That said, there is an argument about the part-time status of councillors, given their responsibilities and the fact that they spend many hours working. Some are part-time councillors, while others are closer to being full-time councillors—and beyond.
Although we are not councillors, we have experienced situations like this one, in which we have had to meet elected people and officials at whatever level. One of the major problems for many young people is accommodating 9-to-5 hours. The question is, how part time a part-time job becomes if someone works part time only between 9 o'clock and 5 o'clock. After all, that is when most young people study.
On the general issue of remuneration, we touched earlier on how to cover care costs, travel expenses and the cost of meeting different needs, such as interpretation services, signers and disabled access. I hope that one day all those aspects will be seen not as exceptions, but as the normal state of affairs. They are as important as factors such as pay if people are to be able to stand as councillors. Moreover, the administrative support that local councils can provide is just as important, especially in rural areas. After all, we cannot really do without telephones, personal computers and so on in normal modern working life.
The bill proposes the introduction of an independent Scottish local authority remuneration committee to establish the detail of the policies. Do you have any comments about that? How should such a body operate?
I can provide a general answer about the Scottish Civic Forum's approach to any such groups: they need to be as widely representative as possible. I will not make a direct plug for our organisation, but we need umbrella groups that can ask grass-roots organisations for their opinions on the proposals. The Civic Forum specialises more and more in reaching less well-organised groups that, as I said earlier, have the least engagement in political process. It is crucial that, instead of finding solutions and imposing them on these people, we engage them from the start.
Have any of you been involved in the widening access to council membership progress group? Do you have any knowledge of it?
We were sent a web link along with the papers for this meeting. However, the web link took me to a list of members and a list of future meeting dates. That was all that I found from looking on the web, so I do not know about the group.
What about the witnesses from the Scottish Youth Parliament?
Our experience was exactly the same.
That is a statement in itself.
Training is one of the major issues in that list. All people who are elected to positions of authority—not only young people—must be trained in certain skills, such as how to consult and represent the people. Obviously, people who stand for election as a councillor should have a certain skills base, but they must also be trained in how to work effectively and to take part in the process. That goes back to what was said earlier about citizenship education and ensuring that young people feel equipped to carry out their functions if they are elected. The Scottish Youth Parliament would emphasise the need for training, which should allow councillors to carry out their tasks and represent their constituents effectively.
We must also encourage the positive view among young people of engaging with the political process. Before we begin the education process, young people need to feel that engaging in the political process is worth while, that they can develop personally from it and that, through it, they can effect change and help their communities, whether locally, nationally or otherwise.
It is worth noting that the progress group has a member of the Youth Parliament on it; you will need to find out what they are saying.
The short answer is yes. That barrier lies alongside that of lack of knowledge about the process. Increasing knowledge of the system—not just, as I said, of the way in which the system works on paper—is the most important issue because that will increase confidence to a level at which young people and those from other disadvantaged groups feel that they can put themselves forward and make a difference.
As I said, that might be achieved by engaging with and taking a genuine interest in the various groups. I cannot stress that enough. Field workers who engage with different groups on the groups' terms are needed. With some communities, such as certain ethnic minorities, there might be a problem because self-appointed chiefs speak on behalf of all members of the group, while people at the grass roots do not really have a voice that is heard. That applies particularly to females from ethnic minority groups, who might be more isolated because they are often not as strong in the English language and so need interpreters. It is important to get down to the bottom and really engage. I hope that funding will allow us to engage with those groups on their terms and get them together to learn from one another. It is all about increasing democratic participation.
The onus is on politicians to improve the image of government. The Parliament is not considered very equal. As Steven Kidd said, we do not see young people, disabled people or even black or ethnic minority people in the chamber, and we certainly do not see people there who do not speak English as their first language. To engage people, politicians need to start considering the image of government in general—not just in local government, but in the Scottish Parliament.
I hope that the bill is a start and that we will have a better committee chamber in the future. Live Johnsrud is right that this room is very formal.
Meeting suspended.
On resuming—
I welcome our second group of witnesses to the Equal Opportunities Committee, which is taking evidence on the Local Governance (Scotland) Bill. Lorna Ahlquist is from the 50/50 Campaign, and Sue Robertson and Fran Loots are from Engender. We have many witnesses this morning, so we will go straight to questions.
The provisions are a start but they are not enough in themselves. For instance, the single transferable vote system could increase the number of women, but there could be problems if the district margins were too small. Our overwhelming feeling is that a package of change must be considered in order to increase the number of women in local government. Some of those elements are contained in the bill, but we need to go further.
We certainly have concerns that the suggested ward size of three to four members is too small. Evidence from elsewhere suggests that a minimum of five members would be a much better size to encourage wider representation of women.
Issues to do with the ordering of candidates on ballot papers must also be considered. The system will help, but unless other aspects of it are considered, it will not deliver the diversity that might be sought.
Is there a danger that political parties will not prioritise, and that although there could be enough women on the lists, they will not be near enough the top to be successful?
Yes. There is a huge issue around the selection process and a lot of work must be done on the whole political culture. There can be quotas and women can get on to lists, but there will be issues unless those women contest winnable seats. On the evidence so far, the selection procedures are not up to the normal standards of equal opportunities selection processes in employment.
So five-member wards would probably be more positive for women's representation.
Yes.
My question is about five-councillor wards. I have listened to evidence that has been given to other committees and I think that there is a general feeling that three or four-councillor wards would be too small for proportional representation to work for some smaller political parties, as well as for women. Can you elaborate on that, or do you think that we have covered five-member wards adequately, as far as women are concerned?
I think that we are saying that there should be a minimum of five members, although there could be more.
Obviously, all councils are different. There are rural councils that cover big geographic areas and there are close-knit city councils. Do you think that five members should be the minimum number in all those wards?
Yes.
That should probably be the case. However, other things, such as job sharing, might help in rural areas and might allow better patterns of working for councillors.
I want to pick up on that point. Dr Fiona Mackay's paper talks about "‘Women-friendliness' and STV". She states:
As I said earlier, a wider package must be considered. In general, proportional representation has a better chance of increasing women's representation, but the single transferable vote system has limitations. However, Westminster legislation could be reinforced by the Local Governance (Scotland) Bill in respect of positive action in the selection of candidates. We must use what is there and reinforce measures that are available.
I would like to discuss positive action. I do not know whether you have heard concerns that have been expressed previously about what has been called positive discrimination rather than positive action. Perhaps that is how some previous witnesses view it. The responses to the Executive's consultation should be considered. The Transport and General Workers Union, for example, suggested that there should be two-member wards in which one female member and one male member would be required. There is also a suggestion that multimember wards should be gender balanced, with rules saying that at least one woman should be elected in a three-member ward, and at least two in a four-member ward. What are your views on that?
That is a difficult question. Various mechanisms can be used, but two factors should be taken into account: the general system and the ward size, and the actions that parties may take to balance their representation within the system. It is difficult to make a quick judgment about that, with those factors being thrown together. There is a need for each party to seek mechanisms that will work for it. Various methods have been used with respect to boosting the number of women in the Scottish Parliament. The lessons need to be drawn from that and then considered in relation to local government.
I would assume that, in a new system, the issue of incumbents might not be so considerable. Do you have any views on accountability to the electorate in wards with a greater number of members, where there could be a positive impact on gender balance?
That is clearly an issue—the bigger the ward, the more people are concerned. People might feel that they know their various councillors less well. That aside, some local government councillors are in cabinet-type arrangements, while others work more at a constituency level. The larger ward size might present an opportunity for both types of councillor to represent the same ward. Some might be involved at the executive level of local government; others might work more in the constituency. There would not be so much of a divorce under those circumstances. There are pros and cons under any system.
There are a lot of issues around people's disaffection with the political process. If diversity is increased, that might help to get away from some aspects of that and improve people's relationship with the process. There are dangers in sticking with what we have now, as opposed to moving to enhanced diversity. Perhaps the councillor-ward link is of more concern to the councillors than it is to the electorate. We need to find out what the electorate feels. Their disaffection must be got over, and we have to take measures that move us on in that respect.
We can leave the issue of direct accountability to one side for the moment.
As it stands, the pension proposal is to be welcomed, but the remuneration really needs to go further. In terms of candidates for the last election and councillors who are in position now, one in three women have to make special arrangements for child care. For men, the number is far fewer—it is one in 10. The reality is still that women bear the majority of responsibility for child care. My understanding is that the proposed amount is about £12,000, which is quite low, when one takes into account child-care costs. The whole area needs to be revisited. Kerley said that separate care costs would not be considered, but that is a huge barrier for women. Part of the Scottish Parliament's attraction for women is that remuneration is such that child-care costs can be borne within it. I would not, with two children to find care for—let alone additional responsibilities that might fall my way—consider any position in local government that paid £12,000.
There is a difficulty in that women are economically disadvantaged compared to men. The comparatively small amount of money that is available for work in local government is going to be a major stumbling block, especially for women who are self-supporting, and it will be particularly difficult for lone parents. That has to be looked at. Job sharing could be helpful in making it easier for people to do the job part time.
Engender's submission makes the point about women councillors having to make child-care arrangements. It also says:
We are talking about some kind of direct subsidy of care costs, whether child care costs or costs of care of dependents, if there are such costs involved. That would certainly help. We are also talking about the timing of activities and meetings, which includes council meetings and party group meetings. There is a raft of issues around how we can make activity more family friendly.
We really need to look at the family friendliness of council meetings, and so on. Where I live, it is hard to access child care. There is an issue about access to care for children and care for dependent older people, so access to such care needs to be put in place. If there were good systems locally, there would be less of an issue. There is an issue about money, but there is also an issue about accessibility of care, especially in rural areas.
Job sharing has been mentioned a couple of times. I have served on a council under the present system. A councillor who is allocated a place on a planning committee or whatever builds up expertise over time on the issues that come before that committee. He or she builds up a case load in relation to constituents and so on. Have you had any thought about the practicalities? I cannot imagine how job sharing would work, so have you had any thoughts about how it would work in practice?
It does not seem that councillors job sharing would, in principle, be all that different from a paid job, in which people work out between them how to handle things.
I have worked on several job shares. They work best if one person takes a lead in a particular area. Councillors are usually on several committees. So, if councillors were to job share, one would take the lead in certain committees and the other would take the lead on others. If, for example, one councillor falls ill, the other could step in because they would have enough background information. However, major responsibility for progressing work from a committee would fall to the councillor who was the lead in that committee. Posts that are quite senior have been job shared; it should not be beyond the realms of creativity to manage job sharing within local government.
There is a lot of bias against part-time working and job sharing. There has been for a long time, but there are ways of making them work. On the issues around accountability to the electorate, job sharing and acceptability of women candidates to the electorate, many of the assumptions that are made—and many myths—can be debunked by having the right systems, structures and processes in place to enable the arrangements to work. Good support being provided to councillors makes such practices easier.
Some of the issues that I will raise have been touched on previously. My questions are about the procedures that have been put in place. The councillors' remuneration progress group is examining the new system of remuneration for councillors, their role, their time commitment and their salary. Those relate to many of the issues that you have been talking about. What factors that relate to the working practices and pay of councillors do you feel the progress group should give particular consideration to in order to encourage the participation of women?
As you said, we have covered a number of those issues. The solution is to have a more family-friendly approach in the first place. There are also issues about changing the culture and how politics is perceived. One of the factors that encouraged women into the Scottish Parliament was that they perceived that there was an opportunity to have a new kind of politics; there was a different framework within which to operate. The ground rules that were laid down were seen as being more open.
The cultural aspect of the matter is important. In the 50/50 Campaign, I speak to women who are in political parties and so on. The methods of campaigning, the selection processes and the culture within which they must operate are very hard for women, so that must change if access is to be widened. The current culture suits a certain type of person and it must be widened to suit a wider range of people and to attract women and other groups. It must be based much more on an equalities framework.
It is important that we have such comments on the record. Are there any issues that you would like to highlight for the progress group, which it might address to encourage people on lower incomes or who have family commitments to participate?
The issues are around remuneration, access to child care, care services and so on. There is a need to assign funds to political parties to enable them to promote women, because my perception is that women in parties find it hard to meet, hard to get together, hard to support each other, and hard to influence the processes in their parties.
The bill proposes an independent Scottish local authority remuneration committee to determine the details of the policies. Do you have any comments on the establishment of that committee and how it should operate?
Success will depend on the committee's remit, and whether addressing of the remuneration package includes selection processes and so on. If the remit is narrow it will be more difficult—
It depends on the detail of how it will work.
Yes.
The issue is who will be on the committee on how it will work.
There needs to be research into what would make a difference to excluded groups in terms of people in such groups standing for election to local government, which is difficult for people who have to be self-supporting because of a combination of things. It is difficult financially if one has to be self-supporting and it is difficult in terms of time if one is trying to do a paid job, look after family responsibilities and look after political issues. More background research is required on what puts people off and on what would make a difference, otherwise we are operating in the dark. It is difficult to examine any of the issues in isolation. There should be more discussion with groups about what would make them willing to stand.
There is an issue of how to get into the whole process in the first place. A person who wanted to be a councillor came to me and asked how she could have her children looked after. She cannot even start on the ladder. A person who stood said that her election agent was her child minder while she was campaigning. There is no level playing field, unless a candidate has an angel for an election agent and a council that provides facilities.
Have any of you been involved in the work of the widening access to council membership progress group?
No.
The group has been set up to take forward work on making council membership more attractive to a wider cross-section of the community. It will make recommendations on the training, development and support that are given to councillors. Which issues in relation to women's representation do you recommend require particular attention from the progress group?
There are huge issues around the selection process. We know from research by the Equal Opportunities Commission that there is perceived to be a lot of discrimination at parliamentary level. There is no reason to think that that does not apply to local government. In its submission to the Local Government and Transport Committee in December, the EOC suggested a checklist for the process.
I spoke earlier about limits on people's time. A lot of women are interested in what they can achieve in any government setting, whether it be local government or the Scottish Parliament. One of the things that works against that is the sense that someone has to be there for a long time before they can get anywhere. A lot of women do not have time in their lives for such a long-term, grinding commitment before they can achieve what they went there for in the first place. That is a big culture issue because among people who are there already there is hostility towards people who are perceived as taking shortcuts. We will never improve diversity unless we accept that people who have lots of other pressures in their lives have to be able to get into something and be able to advance more quickly. That should be considered.
Equality standards must be applied to selection processes and there should be monitoring and procedures for appeals and complaints. Dr Fiona Mackay's paper suggested that rules of engagement are incredibly important within and between parties. The Equality Network and I have spoken about the huge need for such rules in engaging with the media as well as among political parties and in political debate. We need to raise those standards and make them far more ethical than the current horse-trading, which brings politics into disrepute. Rules of engagement and equality standards have to be put in place.
The Engender submission comments on how candidates lack the confidence to put themselves forward, whether they are women or not. How can we overcome such barriers? In local government, perhaps even more than in the Scottish Parliament, the atmosphere can be quite aggressive. How do we encourage women to put themselves forward and change some of that?
There is a role for training and women-only training on a cross-party basis and within parties. Some parties, particularly constituency parties, make some moves in that direction, but they are sporadic and fragmented. We should provide a culture that welcomes women and measures should be taken on different fronts to achieve that.
There was a lot of early judgment about the cultural differences between the men and women, or perhaps between those who had been in the political system a bit longer or had worked in a particular way. At the start of the Scottish Parliament, the women were not seen as sounding or looking the same. That can be quite difficult.
It can be difficult. In the training that we do, we discuss the media impact and how negative it was. It takes a while to overcome such negative perceptions. The evidence from much of the research on women in leadership and management shows that, in the culture at large, women often have more negative press. That is why it is even more important to use a raft of measures to create a culture that allows women and minority groups to come forward.
There is a need for clear leadership and clear messages at all levels of Scottish society. There is also a need for a huge input of support and training. When I did some research before meeting Tanzanian women MPs who came over here, it was quite a shock to me to realise that the British Council had provided for them £1 million in support that went from the grass roots right to the top: they had support on a massive scale. That happens across the world, yet we have virtually no support and training here in Scotland. We have tiny packages of training that we struggle to provide.
We struggle to fund those packages, as well. Most of the funding is short term and is not built into the system.
The Kerley report recommended that councils should review their arrangements and organisation and consider whether they contain factors that impact on women's participation. Fiona Mackay's written evidence states:
We have already covered many of those barriers, such as culture, attitudes, lack of family-friendly hours and difficulties that are caused by the style of decision making.
A key thing, to which Cathy Peattie alluded, is expectations. Where councillors, for example, have operated relatively unencumbered by domestic factors, expectations about the work that they do will have been shaped by that. Women who come in with lots of domestic responsibilities will struggle with such a work load. For diversity, it is important that we make jobs manageable, no matter whether they are paid or elected positions. There must be a realisation that people cannot be expected to do ridiculous amounts of work at the same time as they do all the other things in their lives.
Lorna Ahlquist suggested some sort of audit system for local authorities. If local authorities adhered to the mainstreaming agenda, would that make the kind of difference that we aspire to make?
For a long time in local authorities, there has been a push at officer level for things such as equal opportunities training and raising of awareness levels. There has often been talk about providing the same for elected members but, as far as I am aware, that has not happened. That is an area that should be considered.
I thank you all very much for your evidence this morning. We have a long meeting this morning, so it is important that we hear as much as we can from the organisations that come before us.
Meeting suspended.
On resuming—
I reconvene the meeting by warmly welcoming the final panel of witnesses, who are Ron Skinner MBE, of the Scottish Disability Equality Forum; Rami Ousta of the Black and Ethnic Minority Infrastructure in Scotland Ltd; and Kemi Adebayo of Multi Ethnic Aberdeen Ltd.
It would have been easier for me to name the aspects that are not barriers, especially for black and ethnic minorities.
I want to follow on from some of Rami Ousta's comments without repeating any of the points that he identified about barriers. We should address the culture of differences and the lack of understanding of, and information about, how the system works. I think that one of the major problems is terminology. For example, I am an African and know a lot of women and men who are politicians or who are involved in political parties back home. However, when they come to this country, most of them feel that they do not understand the system, that there is nothing in it for them and that they cannot make a difference. In fact, I am aware of a few people now studying in Aberdeen who were key active politicians back in Nigeria; however, they will not vote or even register to vote.
I can perhaps put into perspective the representation of minority groups on local councils for my sector—the disability sector. According to the figures from the 2001 census, 20 per cent of the Scottish population have a long-term illness. That is 25 per cent more than the figures that members were given in evidence from the Disability Rights Commission, which talked about 800,000 people. It is important that the issues that affect that proportion of the population are understood and addressed.
Do you believe that the bill's provisions for proportional representation and electoral wards will have a positive impact on widening the representation of ethnic minorities and people with disabilities in local government? Will the bill make a difference?
The spirit of the bill is excellent and the bill will make a difference. However, although we might be able to get two or three ethnic minority candidates for wards in areas that are heavily populated by ethnic minorities, I wonder how the bill's provisions will work in isolated areas in the Highlands and Islands, the Borders and the Galloway area, where small ethnic minorities do not have any representation. Will the bill's provisions disadvantage them or help them?
Do other panel members wish to comment on whether the bill will make a difference?
Like any other bill, the bill should make a difference, and I hope that it will, but the question is how many in minority ethnic communities are aware of it and its contents. If we are not aware of legislation, how can we expect it to work for us as well as for others? There must be education about the Local Governance (Scotland) Bill to increase awareness of it and to let minority ethnic people know that it will make a difference to them. They should have been more involved in the consultation process.
Good morning. I want to move on to remuneration. If the bill is enacted as it stands, it will introduce for councillors
Like I said, the remuneration and pension proposal will be an incentive to people. When I first approached my female and minority ethnic friends and asked them what they thought about my being invited to stand for election, the first thing they said was that they hoped I knew that I would not get paid anything apart from £8,000 or £6,000 a year for expenses. I laughed and told them that, for me, the point was not to get money but to serve the public and the community. In return, they asked how many of them could get by on such an amount when they have other expenses to meet and said that it was okay for me because my husband was working. That is how we have to think about the question.
On child care, is the issue solely to do with remuneration or is it also to do with accessibility? For example, would it be important for a crèche to be made available when you attend a meeting?
Yes. Before I came to the committee, I checked the train times back to Aberdeen and realised that I will miss the 12:10 train and will have to get the 13:10 train. I usually pick up my children from school—this year, I made it a point of duty to do that—but, as I will be unable to do so today, I had to telephone somebody and ask them to do it instead. If I knew that my kids were safely in a crèche, I would be able to attend meetings without worrying about them.
Convener, perhaps we should take that issue into account when we arrange the order in which we will deal with witnesses. It might be better to take certain people before others for the reason that we have just heard.
I think that it is my fault for not checking the timetable.
I think that having remuneration for councillors would be a positive step, particularly for people with disabilities who might be on state benefits. It is argued that the loss of those benefits would be a disincentive but, while most of the benefits are means tested, the disability living allowance is not and so would not be lost. I do not think that you can have your cake and eat it. Provided that the remuneration is set at a realistic level, it would attract people to get involved.
Before we move on to—
I think that Rami Ousta wanted to comment.
Am I allowed to?
I had a specific question for Ron Skinner, but please go ahead and I will go back to him.
Go ahead. I will wait until you have finished with Ron.
I wanted to pick up on a specific thing that Ron said. You talked about the financial disincentive. In its submission to the Local Government and Transport Committee, the Disability Rights Commission said:
No.
So you would categorically disagree with that statement.
Yes. I do not think that the DRC has researched that specific issue in depth and brought out the examples. Before coming to the committee, I had a ring round a number of friends who are deeply involved in the benefits side and that is the answer that they are coming to me with. Obviously, income support is the prime example. If someone is in employment and they are above a certain level, they will lose income support, but within income support there are hidden passports to other types of free services, such as eye tests and dental treatment. I abide by my comment that one cannot have one's cake and eat it.
Can I also be clear that you were saying that you would like some account to be taken of the cost of that, either in the bill or in the accompanying documents? For example, the Parliament has a budget so that, if a member employs someone with a disability and has to change their office for access reasons, a particular amount of money can be accessed. Is that the kind of thing that you are talking about in relation to the bill?
Yes. I am always wary of putting down financial limits. I think that the test would be whether the expenditure incurred was reasonable.
You are saying that some money should be ring fenced for that. Is that correct?
Yes.
I am sorry, Rami, but I felt that I should pick up on those points as they were made.
That is fine. I just want to confirm that the section on remuneration is excellent for our community. We are aware of various groups, members of which would love to stand as councillors. The main concern, especially among those from unrepresented groups—we are talking about communities such as the Arab community, Gypsy Travellers, the Jewish community and the African community—is that there is nothing in it for them. They have a job that supports their families; they would not lose it to be a councillor when there is no incentive for them to do that. The proposal is also essential for women—for child care and support.
You make an interesting point, which perhaps goes back to something that the previous witnesses mentioned about the British Council, which provides support for Tanzanian women who become MPs. I know about that, because last year I was shadowed by a Tanzanian woman MP for a week. Are such shadowing arrangements the type of thing that you are talking about?
Shadowing was one of the ways of improving the situation that I had thought of. That would work, because people would do it because they had an interest in doing it rather than because they were forced to do it. That would give people the opportunity to see what the commitment is and to make a decision. We should not just lump together women, ethnic minority communities and disabled people.
I echo the point about training. There ought to be regular training for councillors. I do not know whether it is possible to have continuous professional development, but it would be useful to have a proper training programme. I have come across many chairmen who had no idea how to conduct a meeting or of their responsibilities and duties when they assumed the chair. Sorry, convener, I am in no way making any inferences about you.
Not at all. I went through half my political career thinking that one had to be a man to be in the chair.
That is not helpful; it is essential. We are a national umbrella organisation for black and ethnic minority voluntary sector organisations in Scotland. Through working with diverse community groups, we know that most councils' dealings with communities are through gatekeepers. Councils are happy to channel everything through those gatekeepers only, while the rest of the community continues to be disadvantaged and not involved.
There is no danger of my kicking you out.
We would like to encourage as many people from black and ethnic minority communities as possible to stand as councillors. That means diverse communities. As we know—it is not a secret—the Asian community and the Chinese community are well established in Scotland and have their experiences, which are mainly in the two major cities. However, other community groups that have been in Scotland for years and which actively serve their communities do not have the chance even to air their views or to participate in any forum or panel. Those are the groups that should be encouraged. Plenty of professionals among them would love to be councillors. Some disabled people's groups have the skills and would love to have councillors, but they think that only the political parties have the right to nominate candidates. We would like to open that up to our communities.
Engagement, particularly with disabled people, is an issue. One peculiarity of disability is that people make decisions for disabled people, especially if they come from an institutional situation. In our organisation, which involves some 150 organisations that deal with different aspects of disability from the Shetlands to Dumfries and from the Western Isles to Aberdeen, we are trying a bottom-up approach and allowing those organisations to dictate to the umbrella body the issues that they want to be developed. Encouragement and engagement are difficult in our sector, but if the passion is felt, people will become councillors.
I am tempted to ask more questions on that subject, but I will not because I hope that we will take more evidence on the matter another time. My next questions are about the groups that have been set up. The Scottish Executive has established the councillors' remuneration progress group to consider the new remuneration system for councillors and the role, time commitment and salary of councillors. What factors relating to councillors' working practice and pay should the group consider to encourage more diversity in council membership?
I would like the group to have exposure to the issues that concern my sector—the extra costs and difficulties of participation. If the group is aware of those matters, perhaps it can cover them in recommendations.
Issues that must be considered are councillors' skills and responsibilities, the financial situation of a councillor who may be from an under-represented group, which might involve considering family background—for example, women may have child-care responsibilities—and the costs of disability. The group should consider whether benefits should be secured and maintained for the councillor, who should not be punished for helping the community.
Kemi, do you want to pick up on any points?
I agree with what Rami Ousta has said.
The bill proposes to establish an independent Scottish local authorities remuneration committee to work on the detail of the policies. Do you have any comments on the establishment of that committee and on how it should operate?
There should be a monitoring system. The members of the committee should take equality into account—and not just in name—so that ethnic minorities, people with disabilities and other disadvantaged groups have a voice and can ensure that their needs are met. I have only a general idea of how the committee will work. Whether it will have to consult committees or individuals directly will be an issue. We will encourage the committee to get the different communities involved, even in rural areas—the Borders, for example.
I would go along with that, but I would add that a lot of small minority ethnic groups feel over-consulted. I would advise the committee to work with ethnic-led organisations—such as Black and Ethnic Minority Infrastructure in Scotland and Multi Ethnic Aberdeen Ltd—which work with such grass-roots groups. Those small groups do not even have paid staff and they get frustrated when they are over-consulted all the time on such issues. Most of them do not have the time and feel that they have told the Executive what they want. There has to be balance in consultation.
The remuneration committee should consult as widely as possible but take into account the fact that we can be over-consulted and not given sufficient time to respond. Our forum has 150 organisations, some of which may meet only every two months. The timescales for consultation can be difficult.
I have one other concern about the work of the remuneration committee. In some areas, black and ethnic minorities are under-represented on councils. In rural areas such as Aberdeenshire, Dumfries and Galloway or the Highlands and Islands, there are no black or ethnic minority councillors and the councils really do not understand black or ethnic minority issues. Perhaps there should be groups to support such councils to ensure that the black and ethnic minority voice is heard. In our work with the councils, we have noticed that they do not have a clue about ethnic minority issues even though people from ethnic minorities live in the area. Perhaps a small committee of people from the diverse communities could help to support those councils. The remuneration committee could offer money to support that work.
My question is on the widening access to council membership progress group. Have any of the witnesses been involved with that group?
Funnily enough, no. Even though we are the umbrella organisation for the ethnic minority communities, we have never even heard of that group. I heard of it only through this committee, here.
Perhaps we should take up that issue.
Yes, I do. I would like the group to open up to the diverse communities and to avoid working through the gatekeepers. That will not be a minor issue when the group deals with grass-roots community projects; it will be a major issue. There are always one, two or three individuals who are called ethnic minority leaders. However, we do not have leaders; we have communities and we would like to involve them. Any consultation by any group questions one or two individuals, who say, "Yes, we fulfilled so and so," but those are individuals. I repeat that we do not have leaders; we have communities. We would prefer that the group dealt with communities directly through consultations, workshops and focus groups than that it dealt just with individuals. The group on widening access should reach out to the diverse community groups to which nobody talks.
I go back to the power of the media, which we usually think of as being used negatively. In addition to having focus groups and so on, the media could be used in a positive way—for example, to invite communities to debates and discussions where people can talk about issues. People from minority ethnic communities should not be pigeonholed all the time, because other things interest them. In Aberdeen, when there is a phone-in on asylum issues or a similar issue, we are asked, "Do you have a comment? Who can you refer us to?" However, it is different when it comes to arts programmes. Some of us are interested in the arts. Some of us write books. We need to open the debate wider, because although politicians serve their communities, they are also involved in other things.
Yes, you will have transport issues, for example.
Exactly. However, I never get phone calls on transport issues, because the media believe that I am an expert in a particular area. I echo what Rami Ousta said. I am from Africa, I am a member of a minority ethnic community and I have lived in Aberdeen for more than 13 years, but I stress that I am not speaking for the African community and I am not necessarily speaking for all women.
I am an expert on disability—my own—but I have to consult a range of people with different disabilities before I can give informed comment on the complete range of disabilities.
Kemi, I am from Aberdeen as well, so I may well take you up on your open invitation.
I would definitely go with that. My experience is that, if I had not been encouraged, I would not have done what I have done, although I would have kept talking about things. There needs to be encouragement: we need some kind of mentor or buddy system. The situation applies not only to women, but to the minority ethnic communities. It is not necessary for the mentors to come from an ethnic minority background; people from the wider community could become mentors and encourage members of ethnic minority communities to participate in local government.
Lack of confidence is a major factor. However, that applies more generally to communities and not to women who are politically oriented or who belong to a political party in which they have been involved in various activities. Lack of confidence does not come about for no reason; it is probably the result of the social setting to which ethnic minority women have been subjected.
Again, I make mention of disability in relation to confidence. Lack of confidence often stems from the disability itself and is often to do with the extent of the person's disability rather than with the background of the decisions that are taken for the disabled person by someone else—a partner, wife or a family member, for example. That issue needs to be recognised.
You might be aware that the Kerley report recommended that COSLA and representatives from the ethnic minority communities should draw up an action plan to encourage increased participation in councils by people from those communities. Are you aware of the progress that has been made on the issue?
No. I find it amazing that something is being developed at that level and that the Black and Ethnic Minority Infrastructure in Scotland does not find out about it. The reason why our organisation was created and funded by the Scottish Executive was to address the lack of support for the black and ethnic minority communities and the voluntary sector in general. We were not aware of that development until now.
I am not aware of it.
Certainly, in my area of Forth valley—and the Stirling area in particular—black and ethnic groups are well represented in working groups that meet with the council. Things seem to be working fairly well there. I cannot say that the same necessarily applies to disability.
The situation is obviously patchy.
That is essential if we want to fulfil the intentions of the bill. I repeat that any such action plan—or any action group—has to open up to all communities, by which I mean our diverse communities. Politicians should give communities a chance, rather than doing things through gatekeepers, whether they be small local projects or individuals. Any action plan should not be restricted to a discussion with the few; it should be opened up to the whole community, so that everyone can have a say.
There are a lot of action points and recommendations, but are they being acted on? Who monitors whether they are implemented? In Aberdeen, we have been talking about consulting people in the city about issues and needs, but I am aware that a lot of research has been done and a lot of recommendations have been made on which nobody has acted. There are actions points and recommendations, but they are just gathering dust, so who is making sure that they are acted on?
There is always a risk of perpetual consultation and nobody biting the bullet and taking a decision. I agree on that.
Nevertheless, examples of good practice exist. I will cite one from the health service in my area, which is Forth valley. There are issues surrounding service delivery to people who are affected by disability, which obviously includes carers and families. In the Forth valley area, we have been able to get the three local councils—Clackmannanshire Council, Stirling Council and Falkirk Council—and the health service to draw up a strategy for the development of services for people who are disabled. The strategy has been completed, but it has not been put on the shelf to gather dust. A monitoring group has been set up and the strategy is monitored by individuals who were not part of the original strategy group. Those individuals are drawn from the three councils, the NHS in Forth valley and users so that the community is involved as well. That approach is working well. That is an example of good practice. One of the difficulties that we find is that there are examples of good practice elsewhere in Scotland, but nobody knows about them. We need to publicise good practice wherever possible.
That is right. There must be some sort of mechanism by which good practice can be shared and taken up in other areas.
The internet and websites are the best vehicle for that.
I thank the witnesses for their evidence. We will submit a report to the Local Government and Transport Committee, but I expect that we will want to return to the issue, so Rami Ousta might have an opportunity to come back and share some of his great ideas.
I thank the committee and its officials for making the necessary arrangements for me to be here today. You have been courteous and the experience has been pleasant.
Thank you very much.
Next
Petition