Consultative Role Survey Report
Survey Report · Interim Results · Survey Open · Scottish Community Councils
Community Council Consultative Role
116 respondents to date · 99 community councils represented · Survey ongoing · Prepared by Findochty Community Council
Key Findings at a Glance
Perceived Influence on Decisions
Frequency of Feedback from Public Bodies
Quality of Feedback Received
Main Barriers to Effective Participation (number of respondents selecting each barrier, n=116)
What Would Most Improve Effective Engagement (number of respondents selecting each option, n=116)
1. Respondent Profile
116 responses were received from 99 named community councils spanning Scotland geographically - from island and rural councils to urban councils in Edinburgh, Glasgow, and Aberdeen. 78% of respondents have served three or more years. This is not a survey of newcomers uncertain of their role; these are experienced councillors who know the system and are describing how it operates in practice.
| Role | Count | % |
|---|---|---|
| Chair | 35 | 30% |
| Member (elected) | 25 | 22% |
| Secretary | 24 | 21% |
| Treasurer | 13 | 11% |
| Vice-Chair | 7 | 6% |
| Co-opted member | 6 | 5% |
| Other / write-in | 6 | 5% |
| Length of service | Count | % |
|---|---|---|
| More than 5 years | 55 | 47% |
| 3–5 years | 36 | 31% |
| 1–2 years | 15 | 13% |
| Less than 1 year | 7 | 6% |
2. Understanding and Confidence
72% of respondents understand the consultative processes reasonably well or very well, and 64% are confident or very confident in representing their community. These figures establish clearly that the problems identified in this survey are not primarily attributable to capability gaps. Confident, experienced councillors are operating in a system that does not give their input meaningful weight.
| How well do you understand the consultative process? | Count | % |
|---|---|---|
| Reasonably well | 59 | 51% |
| Somewhat | 27 | 23% |
| Very well | 24 | 21% |
| Poorly | 4 | 3% |
| Not at all | 1 | 1% |
| Confidence in representing the community | Count | % |
|---|---|---|
| Confident | 51 | 44% |
| Neutral | 29 | 25% |
| Very confident | 23 | 20% |
| Not very confident | 11 | 9% |
| Not confident at all | 2 | 2% |
3. Workload and Manageability
Opinion on workload is split roughly three ways. 38% find the volume manageable, 24% are neutral, and 33% find it difficult or unmanageable. A third of respondents under real capacity pressure is a significant finding, consistent with the barriers data in Section 7.
| How manageable is the volume of consultations? | Count | % |
|---|---|---|
| Manageable | 44 | 38% |
| Difficult to manage | 36 | 31% |
| Neutral | 28 | 24% |
| Very manageable | 6 | 5% |
| Unmanageable | 2 | 2% |
4. Perceived Influence
| Perceived influence on decisions | Count | % |
|---|---|---|
| Little influence | 53 | 46% |
| Some influence | 32 | 28% |
| No influence | 25 | 22% |
| A great deal | 4 | 3% |
| Don't know / no experience | 1 | 1% |
5. Feedback from Public Bodies
71% of respondents rarely or never receive feedback on how their views were considered. Only 6% report receiving it usually or always. Among those who do receive feedback, 53% rate it as poor or very poor; only 7% rate it as good or very good.
| How often is feedback provided? | Count | % |
|---|---|---|
| Rarely | 60 | 52% |
| Never | 22 | 19% |
| Sometimes | 21 | 18% |
| Usually | 6 | 5% |
| Don't know / no experience | 5 | 4% |
| Always | 1 | 1% |
| Quality of feedback received | Count | % |
|---|---|---|
| Poor - tokenistic or formulaic | 44 | 38% |
| Adequate - acknowledgement with little explanation | 27 | 23% |
| Don't know / no experience | 20 | 17% |
| Very poor - views clearly not considered | 17 | 15% |
| Good - general acknowledgement with some explanation | 7 | 6% |
| Very good - clear explanation of how views were used | 1 | 1% |
6. Examples of Poor Feedback
A large proportion of respondents provided a specific example in their own words. The accounts span planning, active travel, ferry services, windfarms, and Local Place Plans, but share a consistent theme: views submitted formally, with no visible trace of them in the eventual decision or its stated rationale.
7. Barriers to Effective Participation
Respondents selected up to three main barriers. Limited influence over decisions is the most cited by a clear margin - 65% of respondents selected it. This is directly consistent with the perceived influence data in Section 4 and the improvements priorities in Section 9. The fact that “lack of training or guidance” - the most individually remediable barrier - ranks last underlines that the problem is structural, not personal.
| Barrier | Count (of 116 respondents) | % |
|---|---|---|
| Limited influence over decisions | 75 | 65% |
| Lack of volunteers | 50 | 43% |
| Difficulty engaging the wider community | 47 | 41% |
| Lack of support from public bodies | 44 | 38% |
| Complexity of procedures | 37 | 32% |
| Lack of time | 36 | 31% |
| Consultation fatigue | 36 | 31% |
| Poor communication | 34 | 29% |
| Lack of training or guidance | 22 | 19% |
8. Overall Experience
68% selected one of the two most negative framings. Only 4 respondents (3%) described their experience as fully adequate. A small number of write-in responses noted workable local relationships alongside frustration with national consultation volume - a minority view, but a genuine one.
| Statement | Count | % |
|---|---|---|
| Consultation often feels like a tick-box exercise | 46 | 40% |
| Expected to do more without additional resources | 32 | 28% |
| Understand processes but struggle with capacity | 11 | 9% |
| The number of consultations is excessive | 9 | 8% |
| The processes are too complex | 6 | 5% |
| Sufficient knowledge, time, and support to engage effectively | 4 | 3% |
| Other / write-in | 8 | 7% |
9. Suggested Improvements
Respondents selected up to three improvements. Greater influence in decision-making (68%) and more support from local authorities (52%) are the clear top two - selected at rates roughly double those of any other option. The pattern confirms the issue is structural rather than primarily a matter of training, guidance, or process complexity.
| Improvement | Count (of 116 respondents) | % |
|---|---|---|
| Greater influence in decision-making | 79 | 68% |
| More support from local authorities | 60 | 52% |
| Better feedback from public bodies | 46 | 40% |
| Simpler processes | 34 | 29% |
| More volunteers | 33 | 28% |
| Better sharing of good practice between CCs | 25 | 22% |
| More guidance | 20 | 17% |
| Better training | 16 | 14% |
| Clearer explanation of roles | 11 | 9% |
| A paid trained clerk | 1 | 1% |
10. What Would You Change?
108 of 116 respondents answered this question. Four themes dominate across the full corpus of free-text responses:
Earlier involvement. The most consistent theme. Respondents want to be engaged at the start of a process, before a proposal is effectively finalised - not presented with a near-complete plan and asked to comment.
Substantive feedback. Explicit, specific confirmation of how community council input was considered and what effect it had - not generic acknowledgement letters.
Timelier notice. Short consultation windows do not fit monthly meeting cycles, preventing proper engagement with the wider community before deadlines pass.
Being listened to, not just consulted. Multiple respondents draw a sharp distinction between being asked for views, which happens, and those views actually carrying weight, which in their experience does not.
11. Recommendations
The following recommendations are drawn directly from respondent priorities:
- Public bodies should provide structured, substantive written feedback on community council responses, specifying how input was considered and what influence it had — including where it had none, and why.
- Community councils should be engaged at the earliest practicable stage of policy or project development, before proposals are substantially finalised.
- Consultation timelines should accommodate monthly meeting cycles, with a minimum notice period established as standard practice across all local authorities.
- COSLA and local authorities should review the resourcing of community councils in real terms, given that the gap between demands and support has grown substantially since 2009.
- A cross-council mechanism for sharing good practice should be developed or better promoted, reflecting clear demand from respondents.
- The Scottish Government should consider the findings of this survey as part of the evidence base informing the Democracy Matters reform process.
12. Conclusions
With 116 responses to date from 99 named community councils, this is the largest and most geographically representative dataset on this question currently available. The survey remains open, and the report will be updated as further responses arrive. The consistency of findings across three successive snapshots - 13, 57, and 116 responses - substantially reinforces confidence in the picture it presents.
The central finding is clear and consistent: experienced, confident community councillors across Scotland do not believe their consultative input meaningfully shapes outcomes, and most do not receive adequate feedback explaining why. The problem is not a capability gap - confidence and understanding scores are high. It is a structural gap in how public bodies engage with, and respond to, community council input.
These findings are broadly consistent across roles, councils, and regions, and point to a systemic issue in how consultation is practised rather than a failure of effort on the part of community councillors themselves. They are directly relevant to the evidence base for the Democracy Matters reform process currently underway.
Prepared by: