Meeting 1 - 10 July 2006
Meeting held at Cosla Headquarters, Haymarket, Edinburgh
Members were welcomed to the first meeting of the Cultural Planning and Entitlements Working Group.
Attendees:
John Travers (North Ayrshire Council - ADES)
John Zimny (Angus Council - VOCAL rep for Steve Grimmond)
Carl Watt (SMC, rep for Joanne Orr)
Caroline Docherty (Scottish Arts Council)
Lindsay McGregor (CoSLA)
Susan Deighan (Glasgow, rep for Ian Hooper)
Scottish Executive Secretariat:
Leslie Evans (Chair)
Sue Selwyn (SEED - Seconded from Falkirk Council)
Angela Saunders (SEED)
Gillian Miller (SEED)
Apologies: Steve Grimmond, Rod Stone, Ian Hooper, Joanne Orr, Councillor Graham Garvie, Douglas Paterson.
2 Agreement of agenda
2.1 The agenda was agreed and LE suggested that in the interest of transparency and accessibility, and to keep key stakeholders who were are not represented on the working group abreast of the conclusions reached by the group, that the minutes of the group's meetings should be made available on the Scottish Executive's, CoSLA's and other members' websites. This was agreed.
2.2 The role and remit of the group was confirmed. LE mentioned that she was aware that some of the National Institutions had expressed an interest in the work of the group. The members recognised the important role of the key interest groups in the drafting of the guidance and it was agreed that further discussion on this point should take place later in the meeting.
3 Introduction of CoSLA's paper, Cultural Planning and Entitlements - a snapshot
3.1 LM gave a brief introduction to the paper. She teased out some key learning points from the 13 local authority responses to the questionnaire which CoSLA issued to all 32 local authorities to establish a snapshot view of how Councils were currently planning cultural provision; how Community Planning Partnerships were engaging with culture; the extent of cross-authority working on cultural issues; and the extent to which "entitlements" are currently understood and delivered by local authorities. There was discussion around the findings of the paper. Key points raised were:
- Local authorities were generally unfamiliar with the term 'entitlements'. That, and other definitions, would need to be explained in the guidance;
- Links between Community Planning and cultural strategy varied across authorities;
- Partnership working was fundamental to cultural strategy - and good examples of neighbouring and thematic partnerships were already evident.
3.2 The members felt that the number of returns was disappointing but that it was none-the-less very useful to have a current overview. The group reflected that perhaps the low return rate was a result of a lack of common vocabulary and that one of the roles of the group was to firm up the definitions. A lot of good work, in the spirit and consistent with the philosophy of entitlements, was very probably being carried out by many local authorities but was not identified by them under the 'entitlements' banner.
3.3 The role of sport was discussed - in the context of the guidance and it was thought that, when defining culture, many local authorities might include sporting activity. It was agreed that this was a matter for each local authority to decide. The Culture Bill would be focused on the provision of arts, heritage etc and, accordingly, the culture related duties would not make reference to sport. However, the link was acknowledged and it was agreed that sportscotland and the Executive's Sport Policy Division would be consulted and kept in-touch with the work of the group and the developing guidance.
3.4 This paper and its conclusions are available here and on the COSLA Website
ACTION:
- LM agreed to forward background papers to SS
- SS would review the questions in the initial questionnaire, and consider approaching the authorities who responded and possibly some who did not, for additional information with supplementary questions to elicit further key facts
- The CoSLA paper's conclusions about matters the guidance should cover would be incorporated into Appendix 1 of Paper 2
4 Paper 2 - Cultural Planning and Entitlements Work Plan
4.1 SS gave a brief introduction to the Paper and the 2 accompanying Appendices. These laid out a work plan, suggested contents of the draft guidance and a list of proposed key contacts, events and visits. It was agreed that a further 3 formal meetings of the working group should be sufficient. There was much discussion around the format, style and purpose of the guidance, and approaches to dissemination. It was acknowledged that the guidance would have many audiences and would therefore have to be:
- Easily accessible
- Easy to understand (Plain English)
- Thorough in its content
- As succinct as possible
- Available electronically
- Helpful to different audiences
4.2 With these elements in mind, it was thought that perhaps a suite of documents would be most appropriate. This would ensure that a wide range of information could be available without the document becoming cumbersome. It was hoped that the guidance would be an advocacy document as well as serving its purpose of helping local authorities fulfil the forthcoming legislative duties and develop related engagement with Community Planning. It was also agreed that the guidance should not be overly prescriptive and would not be definitive when published for consultation. It would need to able to be built upon as learning (from pathfinders etc) developed.
4.3 The concept of a Cultural Ambassador, referred to in Appendix 1, was discussed with the suggestion that an Elected Member or senior official should champion the new arrangements within each local authority. The role of other key deliverers of culture was also recognised and the importance of early engagement with them highlighted.
4.4 Discussion took place on the proposed contacts, meetings and fact finding visits. The table, Appendix 2, has been updated accordingly.
4.5 On the matter of quality assurance tools, the group noted the complementary work being taken forward by SMC, SLIC and the SAC. There was agreement that it was vital to co-ordinate the various sets of quality assurance tools and guidance, to ease dissemination and handling by local authorities. There was likely to be a core strategic framework capable of being derived from that work.
4.6 A set of questions was posed to the working group at the end of Paper 2. Points agreed in discussion were:
- Members would be given the option of accompanying SS on fact-finding visits;
- A member of the Culture Bill team would attend the next working group meeting to give the members an update on progress;
- It was the Executive's intention to publish the initial guidance and Culture Bill at the same time;
- Members of the group mentioned several initiatives which could inform the project. It would be helpful if, rather than sending full copy documents to the secretariat, extracts or comments about learning points could be submitted - possibly as comments on the draft guidance in due course;
- It was agreed that awareness-raising would be important and members should employ a co-ordinated approach to disseminating information to stakeholders. A core script about the work of the group would be circulated for agreement and posting on websites;
- Members were also asked to think about how they could engage with stakeholders; and
- Members would keep alert for relevant events and meetings at which they might raise awareness of the project. The secretariat would welcome learning about these.
ACTION:
- Members would let SS know if they wished to take part in specific fact-finding visits
- A subgroup dedicated to the drafting of the guidance would be set up
- A quality assurance, monitoring and evaluation subgroup would be set up to undertake co-ordination of the various frameworks being developed
- Members would send to the secretariat extracts or comments about learning points derived from case studies/reports that they wished to commend - rather than sending full copy documents - and/or would reflect this learning in their comments on the draft guidance in due course
- Members would think about how they could engage with stakeholders and contribute to awareness-raising, watching for relevant events and meetings at which to highlight the project. They would also advise the secretariat about their activity in this regard
- The Secretariat would circulate a core script about the work of the group, for members' agreement and for subsequent posting on websites
- It was agreed that the weblink to DCMS's pathfinder and evaluation tools would be provided. It is as follows: http://www.idea-knowledge.gov.uk/idk/core/page.do?wax=lh_mn_0_0&pageId=886623
5 Paper 3 - Ideas for Pathfinders to Test Entitlements and Cultural Planning in Scotland
5.1 AS gave a short introduction to the paper including a summary of the decision to part-fund the Highland Council's Pledge, The Highland Promise. The hope is to fund around another 3 pathfinder projects in this financial year (2006-07) and, through robust evaluation, to maximise learning about the processes, the approach to delivery, and the benefits for and perceptions of those involved. It was hoped in particular, that certain community groups who currently faced barriers to participation in cultural activity could be encouraged to experience the benefits through pathfinder projects.
5.2 AS explained that some local authorities had approached the Executive and proposed possible pathfinder projects. It was agreed that clear parameters for future pathfinders should be set and that all local authorities should then be invited to apply to be considered as a pathfinder host. Match funding and evaluation advice would be available.
5.3 It was agreed that, logistically, identifying brand new initiatives which might be used as pathfinders could be difficult. Given time constraints, it might be necessary to identify projects which were already happening, being planned, or capable of being developed relatively quickly on the back of current activity, and which could benefit from added value.
5.4 It was also agreed that the pathfinders should:
- Provide learning for all local authorities - not just the host authority;
- Identify long-term, strategic process learning as opposed to learning based on project specific criteria;
- Be sustainable; and
- Be of good quality with an element of choice, for citizens, and active participation.
5.5 Experience of cultural planning and input to Community Planning activity should be incorporated. It would also be helpful to explore cross-local authority / Community Planning Partnership working within the pathfinder programme.
ACTION:
- Caroline Docherty would send some recent research regarding 'under-represented' groups;
- A draft letter to local authorities and Community Planning Partnerships should be prepared and sent to the group for comment.
6 Forthcoming events: e.g. the VOCAL Conference
6.1 It was noted that the VOCAL conference would take place on 31 August 2006 and 1 September 2006. There was a good opportunity to influence the workshop activities to include focused discussion of entitlements and cultural planning.
ACTION:
- John Zimny would disseminate the record of the recent VOCAL seminar, which took place on 14 June 2006.
UPDATE:
7 Agreement of next steps, and date of next meeting
7.1 It was agreed that future meetings should be arranged with as much notice as possible. Members are therefore invited to note the dates below:
29 August 2006 - 9:30 am
02 October 2006 - 3:00 pm
07 November 2006 - 3:00 pm
ACTION:
UPDATE:
- These dates have now been confirmed. Glasgow City Council have kindly confirmed that they will host the 29 August meeting at Kelvingrove.
7.2 It was noted that any additional questions or comments should be directed to the secretariat, on the email address above.
7.3 It was agreed that the members were open to subsequent meetings of the working group being held in different locations including places outwith the central belt.
8 AOB
None.
Secretariat of the Cultural Planning and Entitlements Working Group
August 2006