Scotland 2026: Who gets to belong?

• Institute for Public Policy Research
• The Young Women’s Movement
• The Institute for Advanced Studies in the Humanities
• Third Age Trust

Participants

• Casey Smith, IPPR Scotland
• Dr Annie Webster, University of Edinburgh
• Shatha Altowai, Yemeni artist, Edinburgh
• Dr Mar Sánchez Fernández, The Young Women’s Movement
• Ann Keating, Third Age Trust
• Liz Ervine, Third Age Trust
• Professor Lesley McAra FRSE, Institute for Advanced Studies in the Humanities
• Leah Duncan-Karrim, One Parent Families Scotland
• Dr Coree Brown Swan, University of Stirling
• Dr Hayley Bennett, University of Edinburgh
• Professor Nick Watson FRSE, University of Glasgow
• Dr Kevin Guyan (Chair), University of Edinburgh and member of the Young Academy of Scotland
• Dr Nuam Hatzaw, University of Edinburgh
• Dr Anna Stefaniak, University of St Andrews
• Dr Ben Fletcher-Watson, Institute for Advanced Studies in the Humanities
• Ishita Parakh, Royal Society of Edinburgh
• Dr Cristina Clopot, Royal Society of Edinburgh

Transcript

This transcript has been automatically generated so may feature errors.

0:00
Welcome to the Royal Society of Edinburgh and the Scotland 2026 roundtable on who gets to belong. And my name is Dr Kevin Guyan. I work as a researcher and a writer at The University of Edinburgh, and I’m being the chair for today’s session. My work looks very broadly at experiences of LGBTQ communities in Scotland and the UK, particularly ideas about data and how we count different marginalised and minoritized groups. And these are all very timely topics as we reach end of the year, end of 2025 and go, maybe excitingly, into a new year, an election year in Scotland, with Hollywood elections coming up in May 2026, so today, by we’re all gathered at this roundtable. We’re going to be exploring who feels included in Scotland’s future and who remains on the margins without the systems and structures that creates these divides, and, importantly, action, focus. What can we all do in response to this so across all of our work, and it’s been exciting for me to come in the room and see all the different name tags, see where people are coming from. Today, we’re going to be thinking about how we can navigate these big challenges and how we respond to these issues shaping our times. We’re going to be thinking about things such as the multiple and intersectional effects of inequalities on our everyday lives. We’re going to be thinking about the polarisation and the mobilisation of the far right in Scotland and the wider UK, conspiracy theories the media and how we make sense of the world around us, global unrest, war and genocide and our individualization or the lack of connections among others. So big, big, big topics, and I hope we’ll touch on some of these themes in our conversation today. I also don’t want us to lose sight of the many wonderful things that surround us, many wonderful aspects of living and working in Scotland today, including that sense of feeling connected through resistance, feeling connected through solidarity, benefiting from the amazing developments We’ve seen across tech and science being surrounded by nature and art and culture and the positive impacts of being part of community. So big talking points ahead this afternoon. So having hopefully set out some of the scene for today’s discussion, I want to get into some of the details about how this will work. I’m sure for many of you, this is a brand new format, and for me, I’ve never shared something quite large prime minister right now, and so we’re going to set up some rules how to hopefully work in the most efficient and effective way. So as you see, we have a very full table. We are also streaming online right now as well, and how would like us to do things rather than going around the table? Not for introductions, what I said compose is that when you make your first contribution, if you can just say a very quick hello, I am a few words on your background and expertise before making your first point. That’ll save us a 30 minutes round the table, round of introductions. I’m also very keen for everyone to be able to contribute to today’s discussion, and so it’d be great if, before making a point, you can pop up your hands and I’ll call you into the conversation. That will mean that those in my sight line don’t get preferential treatments, and I’ll be able to hopefully bring all views into the discussion today, also with a large group, I just want to say, please don’t feel obliged. You have to contribute to everything. There might be some talking points where actually you just want to sit back and listen. And that’s also perfectly fine. Don’t feel like you have to say something. And just because you’re sat around the table for everything that we cover, I also encourage you very, very strongly. Please. Feel free to rock the boat, make a far more lively, interesting discussion if we’re not all on the same page. So be contrarian, be different, be difficult. Feel free to bring in your own expertise and experience. It also obviously goes without saying that contribution that they’re humanising or oppressive are not acceptable. And as I highlighted earlier, we are being live streamed right now on YouTube. So keep that in mind, any contributions that you bring to the conversation, they are going beyond this room. And one final thing I want to add is that there is opportunities for those who are joining us online to contribute to the discussion. So if you’re online right now and listen again and you have a comment or a question, please pop it in the chat, and my colleague from the RSE will be able to bring this into the discussion. So I hope you feel included as part of the conversation this afternoon, very finally. In terms of logistics, split the session into two hacks. And so we’re going to speak for about 40 minutes. We’ll then have a short break and to recharge teas and coffees before coming back for the second part session. And again, about 40 minutes, we’ll have the second part. I’m also going to provide around an opportunity at the end of the discussion for any concluding remarks. We have very nice concluding things you’d like to sum up. There’ll be an opportunity at the end of today’s discussion. Okay, that’s enough for me. I have hopefully set the scene, set out how things will work, and I want to jump into discussion why we’re all here today. And that’s highlighted, these are big questions into big themes. I’m particularly keen to hear from your own expertise, experience, the work of your organisation, your background, and there are no right or wrong answers any of these discussions. And I want to start with a big kind of general question that hopefully everyone in some shape can kind of contribute to, and that’s around what you see as maybe the most pressing concern right now in Scotland when it comes to issues and issues of inclusion and representation. So in your work, in your expertise and your experience, what do you see as the most pressing issue around inclusion and representation, who wants to kick things off, who wants to be the first contributor?

6:29
Yes, this is less research Facebook, but perhaps anecdotal, but I’ve had massive modules at the university. Sorry, I’m Karen Swan from the University of Stirling. I’ve had massive, massive modules this term, and I think one of the things that I left teaching having spent the terms teaching Scottish politics, was that left me quite uneasy. Was the sense of absolute disengagement of young people. There are students who should be very much engaged in politics. They’re taking a politics honours module. I module, they have no sense of engagement, or if they do, it’s very much rooted in the sense of dissatisfaction, disillusionment. They can tell me all sorts of things about the New York City mayoral context. They can tell them me very little about what’s happening day to day within Holyrood. And I do wonder if that’s a result of kind of increasingly polarised space where they’re getting their news from, thus the interest in the mayoral race, but also a lack of outreach, a lack of a sense that politics has something to do with them. And if that’s quite something that felt so profoundly within quite a privileged environment, a university classroom. How is politics reaching people who don’t have that access, don’t have those privileges?

7:49
And it was interesting. Mentioned the New York, New York Mayoral election. Was there anything? What about that charge your seasons? What excited them about what was happening there?

7:58
I think mostly in the Tiktok presence. I’m like, I mean, that’s where they were getting it from. But they felt like, and I can challenge them on this, because we were talking about what makes an effective campaign. Thinking ahead to 2026, how would they want to be spoken to? And they said, Well, this is and they but they seem to think that there was not someone who was speaking to them, someone who was representing their concerns or issues. Yeah, hello.

8:27
My name is Mar I am the policy and research lead for the young women’s movement. We are a national organisation for young women’s rights and political representation in Scotland, and I just wanted to speak to that point, because it really resonates with our research. So we did some large scale research last year, and we showed that one in two young women told us they did not trust politicians to represent them, and 58% said that they thought they had no role at all in the decisions that were being made about their lives. So our data in our experience of working with young women definitely resonates with that idea of like, perhaps, like a disillusionment. I’m maybe going to contradict slightly the part about engagement, because the women that we work with are hugely engaged, and they’re interested in the want to be part of the conversation. So I think that there’s there’s a will, but there’s also, like a feeling of kind of defeat across the board, which is what we need to kind of fight against in the lead up to the election, but also after that. And I guess a second concern for us, and specifically for young women, is the rise of misogyny, the rise of violence against young women, both online, but also in the streets and even in sites of power. So like the violence that women, you know, women politicians or women that are important roles in their communities, are experiencing, it really detracts young women for wanting to take on those roles, because it’s just kind of. Putting themselves at risk. So yeah, I would say, for me, absolutely agree with that sentiment. But also, misogyny is another big problem we’ve got to challenge.

10:12
Thank you. Mark. Anything else from people’s work in terms of inclusion, representation, what are you seeing in your kind of activity? So who’s feeling kind of marginalised or not part of the conversation, if I could

10:23
just jump on to that point. My name is Norm hat, so I’m a researcher at the University of Edinburgh, and I’m just completing a research project on Scottish nationalism and ethnic minority Christians. And I’ve got some like, personal interest in migration as well. Just kind of what you were saying about misogyny kind of made me think about the fact that within Christian circles right now, there’s a big report that came out called the quiet revival, and it’s about people are coming back to Faith, back to Christianity. And there’s a recent BBC article about how a lot of people, young men in particular, are coming back to churches of England, not necessarily because they found Jesus salvation only way of being, but perhaps because they want to align themselves with an institution that is English over and against, you know, other foreign influences, which then kind of lines up, quite unfortunately, very neatly with the misogyny that your research is showing as well, because there’s a particular type of person that they would want to see in their churches, particular type of person they want to see in their leadership, particular type of Christianity, that is that they see as, unfortunately being able to justify misogyny, racism, transphobia, etc, etc, which is something that I think so in my research, I’m looking at Christian nationalism and looking at ideas around Christianity, nation states, all that kind of stuff. And obviously we’re seeing around the world, but that’s unfortunately on the rise, so I think just kind of jumping off at that point, just made me think about what I’m searching Sima

11:45
Karen, professor at the Law School University of Edinburgh, and also director of the Institute for Advanced Studies and humanities. And I’m a criminologist, so I do a lot of work about young people actually in crime, and enjoy. I just want to pick up when you said both you’re saying about marginalisation, and there’s a real issue about gender based violence in Scotland, and it’s increasing, as far as we know, in terms of police recorded crime, 45% increase in number of sexual assaults over the last 10 years, and domestic abuse also rising, too, by 53% since they’ve started recording it. So there’s a real background here, sort of background of misogyny, of violence that many young women and men, too are actually facing, and that, I think that is something that is extremely marginalising and makes people less want to take part in public life. We’ve got a colleague at Edinburgh University, Claire Houghton, who’s doing research on equally safe when she’s trying to look at safe spaces for people on social media, and that’s a really important piece of research, but there is a kind of broader cultural issue around misogyny and gender based violence that we really need to face up to, otherwise there will be extreme marginalisation and linked to that. I think there’s also the fallout from the covid 19 pandemic of how that’s affected young people, we have research that shows that mental health issues around young people have massively increased. There’s been something like over 505% 50% rise in clinical levels depression among certain people, anxieties increased as well. And adolescent mental health services are really very sparse on the ground. And that, again, is something that’s really marginalising for young people, they feel really disaffected, disconnected, and some of the violence that we’re seeing is sometimes sometimes attributes of that violence to others and also to self.

13:30
It’s good to see already these kind of connections and threads coming out in the conversation.

13:35
Nick Watson, Professor disability, Disability Research at University of Glasgow. I don’t want to turn this into like an exclusion Olympics, but I think there’s a you know, we’re seeing the same with people with learning disability, particularly around being victims of hate crime, and where we did, about 90% of people with learning disability regularly experience hate crime in their lives, and I think that leads to huge exclusion. And one of the issues I think is really emerging that we’re seeing now is that the third sector organisations that have worked with and helped bring in these organisations are facing real cutbacks and real problems with securing with getting secure funding, because they get funding, but the funding is often when I’m the chair of a couple of large organisations of disabled people, and you receive the funding in March for next April, and it’s just no way to plan, and there’s a lack of security. So I think that in a way, we’ve got both the individuals feeling excluded, but those organisations that are closest to the to the communities that people live in and can work best to help bring them in, are facing these under such strained times that it’s really hard for them to provide the services that they should be able to provide. And I think if I was to you know for if we’re looking at the next election. Thing that I would be saying to the Scottish Government, if you wanted is the lesson of covid Was that the third sector stepped in and saved the groups that are most excluded, and then immediately after covid, they had their grants cut. And if you know, it is these organisations that can help to tackle that can help bring people back together again, and can help to tackle or to get people more engaged with the political process and so on. And I think there’s a real need to it’s thinking about where we go next, is to say that the third sector show us a way of bringing this, of tackling the problems that we’re seeing.

15:42
Yes, hi. I’m Leah duncream. I’m policy and influence

15:44
and lead at one parent family Scotland. So not to make the discussion to child, children, young people focused. But I think if we look towards the election, it’s actually really important that children, young people are particularly children are included in this course, because with the exception of 1617, year old, they’re not voters. But actually getting social policy right for children young people is absolutely people is absolutely critical. So in 2017 the Scottish Parliament passed the child poverty Act, which said that by 2030 10% or less of children in Scotland should be growing up in relative poverty at the moment, though, what we see in terms of who isn’t included in our discourse, we have a lot of conversations about universalism and about how we tackle child poverty as a broader issue. But within that kind of action, the delivery plan for what that looks like. You have single parent families, families with a baby under one, families with a disabled child, but larger families, ethnic minority families, and I’m going to forget the other one off of my head, but we have six priority families that identified as being at higher risk of poverty. So in 2024 22% of all children were living in relative poverty, 36% of single parent families, and then similar, similar, if not higher, for families with a baby under one, for minority families. And we know that the different barriers to addressing poverty for these groups look very different. For example, for ethnic minority communities, we know that uptake of entitlements to Social Security are significantly lower than they should be. And really one of the interventions there is a bit like community centred, person centred, culturally appropriate income maximisation to kind of tackle some of the stigma surrounding that and ensure that people are receiving what they’re entitled to. But then you have single parent families, and actually some of the barriers that are really pervasive. So you’re looking at, you’re not looking at necessarily income alone, because if you’re a single parent, parent with five year old who has additional support needs, you might have a work requirement, that you have to work their hours a week, but your child needs you to come to school because they don’t have the provision that they need, because they have additional support needs, and they need extra support, so you can’t meet that work requirement, so you struggle to access your entitlements to Social Security, and then that’s a small part of it, and then you’re looking at like knock on impacts on other benefits, and navigating this hugely complex landscape of employment versus childcare versus school, and it becomes a full time job just to navigate what really is your right.

18:11
Thank you. Yes, Haley.

18:13
And thanks Haley Bennett at the University of Edinburgh. And just to build on what both Leah and Nick have said, that I think the question about who is marginalised or not included or excluded. It’s also a question of, how do people participate in society? I think that’s what both of you have actually talked about, or how I would see inclusion as a form of participation. Like, do we have the systems and structures that enable people to participate in society, which then may lead them to participate in politics in a very formal sense, and be represented in formal politics. But there’s everyday politics as well. And I think at the moment, my view and research would show that I think we’ve got to such a residual form of a welfare state that doesn’t enable people so people get so little money that they actually can’t participate in the basics of society. They can’t join in social events, engage in civil society activities. There’s a requirement for third sector organisations to find funding to create the spaces and places that actually for a good, healthy society should already exist in different ways. And I don’t like the phrase a third space, but you know that kind of discourse around is there a third space for different groups? And I think that is probably the enduring issue for Scotland, generally, that we’ve had such a prolonged austerity approach to the welfare state, to society across the UK, not just Scotland, that you end up with single parents in these very difficult situations if you can’t, generally, everyday, participate in society. It’s a big ask to then be fully represented and able to participate in politics. And I think that’s probably what would be the big issue. How do we reinvest in the welfare state and public services more broadly, that creates a more equal grounding and stops the marginalisation? People don’t choose to be marginalised. People are placed in positions that exclude them from various types of workplaces and civil society and social spaces.

20:11
So yeah, thank you. I think which is helpful. So yeah, kind of zoom out and think about those systems and structures, those means and methods of participation. And before moving on. The next question I did want to ask you. I’ve spoken quite a lot about young people and children and the Third Age trust, for kind of older people, are they feeling included and represented? Are they feeling excited about the next election?

20:33
I think that’s a very I was just sitting thinking that, that we were reserving from the Third Age trust, and also from the Third Age Trust, which you may or may not have heard of and work with. It’s a self help kind of organisation which works with people here in retirement, etc. Do I in one sense, we’re a privileged generation. We’re told that often, and you know, where the Boomers were this, and we’re that, and that’s okay if you’re on the right side of if you’re on the winning team, as I would always say, if you’re not there, and if you’re not getting an occupational pension, and if you’re don’t own your own home, and you’re just living in the state pension. And dare I said, if you’re female, I suspect that life isn’t quite so rosy, and I’m not sure that the I do feel older people do feel certain older people do feel marginalised, and that’s that’s, you know, a lot depends on health issues, transport, housing, money and that, and how that looks. And I suspect that many do not trust our political leaders at this moment in time, no matter what politics, political party they’re in. So I do feel that they feel marginalised. For example, in Scotland, I think I’m right in saying that the commissioner for older people doesn’t exist anymore, which it did before. And so I do feel we’re just slightly invisible. And I don’t I think that, I think the pandemic didn’t do in favours. In that respect for older people, I think there’s many

22:07
older people frightened, frightened about their future. Again, as Liz and I, we’re lucky. We’re teachers, we have professional pensions, and we have a very nice retirement. Thank you very much. But I think if I didn’t have that pension. If I was living on my own, I would worry about who cares for me when I’m sick. Am I well treated when I’m sick because I’m 75 and am I discriminated against because I’m 75 does anybody listen to people of our age, or do they all think that we’re taking the money and taking resources and sort of taking over. We vote. Our generation does. We’ve always voted, and so that’s why they caught us, and why the triple block pension is still there. But I think there’s tremendous fear. There’s tremendous are we accepted by society? Are we just a burden on society? And many older people feel a burden, which is a shame, because we have a huge amount to offer.

23:03
A lot to offer. I

23:04
want to add something. I don’t know if that’s related, but the half many things in my mind, the first of the misogyny, I thought the only misogyny exists in my home country, in Yemen. I’m from Yemen, visual artist and and yesterday, I was just awarded the Arab personality of failure. And unfortunately, there is misogynist comments about what did I do, why I look like this, why I wear like this instead of the what I did. I mean, if I was a man, that will different, will be different conversation. And unfortunately, here, when I stand here, also I see about the the media, about the refugees and different pressure. So me is standing sitting here table, feel a little bit anxiety being a woman and a refugee at the same time in a country that doesn’t, these days, doesn’t like this, yeah. So inclusion actually also the terms of creative, creative people in doing you in the policy making, we don’t see them. We see them only in festivals and in a cheerful way, but we did not we’re not included in the structure of the policy making, for example, in education, in NHS or something, creative spaces, we don’t see them. And this is, unfortunately, this, why we have undervalued. We are undervalued as as, as whenever, whenever there is something with the country, financial barriers, or something. They play the creative industry and then they reduce the fund from the creative because we are an extra, not an essential, part of that. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you.

24:51
Congratulations on that award as well. I want to continue this conversation and get a little bit more into details now and think more about kind of what Haley. Were saying about structures systems, bit more about the kind of particulars, almost how people are enabled or constrained from from engaging. So I’m keen to hear in your work, in your kind of experiences and activities, what have you seen in terms of these more specific structure systems that enable or constrain people’s ability to get involved.

25:24
So I do a little work in the kind of poverty spaces I’m sure you’d imagine. And I think there’s a lot of discourse in Scottish Government, and actually not Scottish Government, but across the UK, about what what participation looks like, and what it should look like. But actually, if you’re talking to if you’re talking about a single parent who can’t afford the bus to get to the library, to have access to a computer to apply for jobs, then the first thing on their mind isn’t what participation looks like. So we put a lot of time and thought into actually how you support meaningful participation that isn’t exploitative. And I think that’s really a big part of it is it’s not it’s not come in. We’re going to ask you lots of questions about topics. It’s difficult and potentially quite traumatic, because poverty is traumatic for families. We’re not just going to come in ask you these questions. Say, Thanks, off you go, and there’s no follow up and there’s no what’s the outcome from this? And that’s where the conversation ends. So there’s a lot of conversation in the third sector and with the Scottish Government, about what meaningful participation looks like, and that’s following up and saying, Well, this is what we’re going to take forward. This is how we’re using your views. We’re going to build we’re going to have a relationship based practice, where we’re going to do it over a number of sessions, and you get something out of it as well. And and it’s definitely an ongoing learning process. I think we’re not Not, not all spaces are there yet. But particularly, as I say, when we talk about poverty, there’s really that risk that if you don’t do it well, it becomes quite

26:55
exploitative. Just yeah, in terms of the kind of the particulars, in terms of engagement, disengagement, in terms of your work. So anything that has kind of come to mind in conversation so

27:06
far, yeah, so I’m Annie Webster from University of Edinburgh, and my research looks at storytelling practices and creative practices more broadly, amongst refugees being settled in Scotland. And part of you know, what attracted me to that project was the new Scots refugee integration strategy, which is so distinctive and has really been hailed as a model across Europe of, you know, best inclusive practice. And part of that strategy has a real focus on multilingualism. So, you know, embracing different languages, building on Scotland’s multilingual kind of history in that sense. But when I’ve actually got to doing the research, access to language lessons, to English as a foreign language, is just so hard to come by. And you know, part of that has been coming out of covid the provision of that online has been moved online and have never quite shifted back to in person. So about just the very basic pragmatics of inclusion, access to learning languages, and that one is a really key, yeah,

28:09
bringing things back to basics, and also from prepping notes for day. I’m surprised how frequently covid has come up in discussion already. That is not something I forecast in such open points. So is there any other contributions around kind of, these systems, these structures, these kind of, more kind of concrete things which are working or not working to

28:30
enable, I would say the u3 a the Third Age Trust works really well. It’s a wonderful model. It’s a corporate model. There’s no leaders as such. We all work together. It costs very little, and we because we’ve got so much experience, so much wealth experience, we have wonderful groups and organisations happening. Our main problem, though, is that we’re middle class. So how do we attract it’s low cost. How do we attract other people and middle class people into our organisation, middle class, white, I might add, as well. So we want to attract a diverse group into our organisation, which I think is very successful, but we’re not being successful. Are we? Liz, we’re not. We’re trying.

29:12
We’re trying, but I think we’re we’ve the field, is the wrong word, but we haven’t succeeded to attract people of more diverse

29:23
population, you have any sense what is the barriers? So the any sense

29:27
confidence is confidence, if you’re a middle class woman, you can walk into a room and say, Hello, if I’m not a middle class woman, and I walk in and I see this group of people with Professor this and doctor this, and somebody else that I’m going to walk back out again very quickly. So it’s building that confidence and reassuring people that they have something to offer and everybody’s welcome. How do we do that? We’re still struggling to find out, and we still remain white, middle class.

29:59
Yes. I think to pick up on point Hayley made. I think that one of the problems with it, with the welfare state, is that giving people the support and the money to participate or to become participants. And this is where I think what works well, in my experience, my research, is a cash transfers, rather than giving people services. It’s cash transfers like direct payments of some form or other, and I mean, they’re not enough at the moment, they’re not generous enough. But in things like access to work, it’s the cash transfer that enables disabled people to work, and it’s cash transfers in other across other sectors that that help people participate. And if things like, you know, mobility allows without that, people can’t get into the community and can’t can’t drive. And I think what was very successful for young people was things like the free bus. Bus has been really helpful to get people in, but then, at 22 lots of people still don’t have money and that free bus, the free bus runs out so they can’t get to access to public spaces. So and again, it becomes an expense and a way to stop and understand it has to be some way of running and paying for a bus service. But it’s that sort of thing that needs that helps, giving people making participation easier and removing the costs from it is a real

31:26
is a real issue, which is something concrete and something can be done. It’s not just a vague idea.

31:31
Yeah. So, I mean, I’ve been part of a Scottish Government working group on social behaviour, and we did a lot of consultation, over 200 groups. We were community groups. We consulted around this. And social behaviour is going down, but it’s concentrated in certain areas, and that’s one of the things that actually really inhibits people from participating anything in the community, and particularly older people who become victims of antisocial behaviour. And people from ethnic and minoritized ethnic communities, gypsy traffic communities, they’ve now stopped reporting hate crime because it’s just a normal part of their everyday life. And what we saw in that research that we did for the for the report, was that community infrastructure, as it is, collapsing across Scotland, that austerity over the last 10 years meant that Leisure Services, things are basic things in communities that bring communities together, young people can use, old people can use that’s all just disintegrating. And that means that kind of the nature of what a community is, or how a community could mobilise, how people can feel safe in the community and participate, those sorts of things have disappeared. Is concentrated in certain areas and around areas of high levels of poverty. And what I also see from another piece of research we do, which is looking at as a geographical maps of Edinburgh and concentrations of deprivation, what you find is that in those sorts of communities, everything is really difficult, so that the areas of concentrated violence, police recorded violence is on those areas, high levels of school exclusion, high levels of people going to prison. So there are areas across Scotland with limited community infrastructure who then gets stuck in poverty, and nothing seems to change that. And that is that is something that if we don’t tackle, it will be very pernicious over the longer term.

33:16
Cassie, yeah, my name is Casey Smith. I’m a researcher at pr Scotland, and just responding to what Lesley had to say there. I think this might be a bit of anecdote. I’ve also been looking into this matter, which is municipal disintegration.

33:31
I just ask that you speak up. Just sort of,

33:34
sorry, yes. So I’ve been looking into the matter of municipal disintegration. Basically what I’m referring to there is like high streets, which are feeling kind of let down a depressed state, litter, empty bandstands. Fact that I’m from Falkirk and it’s just wandering down the high street is quite depressing. It feels increasingly like it’s these high income areas they can afford to have, like a strong civic culture and civic life like the community. Community gardens are tended to, like walls are painted, graffiti is absent, and it’s just it’s cumulative effect for people who are living in these more underserved communities. And it goes without saying that the willingness to engage in a more active role and civic life, because they look around and it’s kind of broken windows effect that casino needs to go on,

34:36
yeah, and just yeah, the image of that kind of abandoned bandstand.

34:42
How I’m a social psychologist, and I work at the University of St Andrews. I’m going to start with the caveat, I am a fairly new transplant to Scotland, so I feel very under qualified to speak about what is happening here. But. I do have a couple points. One is about the fact that the research, not mine, but the research that I’m quite aware of, shows that people from marginalised, disadvantaged communities tend to be super sensitive to any cues of a lack of belonging. And I think this is one of the things that we need to understand if we want people to participate, for instance, right? If you come from groups that are just accepted in those spaces and they feel like they’re accepted, even if they’re in an ambiguous situation where you know, you come to a room you don’t know anybody, right? You’re gonna, you will tend to interpret that situation as you know, being accepting of you, whereas we know that people of colour, people from diverse backgrounds, people with disabilities, any kind of characteristics that differ them from the sort of mainstream society, they would tend to interpret those those same cues as showing you know you don’t belong here, and then they would be more likely to withdraw from those spaces. There is some research showing that there are interventions even brief that can help that. So that was done primarily in academic contexts where, for instance, students of colour would participate in a one hour session where they were told that this is how it operates, right, just making it sort of more conscious. And then evidence showed that throughout their college experience, and then years later, they would show better outcomes than those who are not in those even very brief interventions. And the second thing on community participation, this is anecdotal evidence, so I’ve always lived in large cities, and this is the first time ever for me where I live in a very small community. So I live in a village of, I want to say, 600 people now, very, very small, where the local community is so incredibly active, and it is, I don’t think it’s an underprivileged community, but there is definitely wide income distribution, and the community strives to engage people from sort of different level of affluence as well. There are many events. The community came together and bought the pub, so now the pub in the villages community owned, there are events throughout the day that are aimed for the community, where people can come and, you know, have lunch for two pounds, not for 20, right? So that everybody can participate. And this, this makes a huge difference for us as immigrants and newcomers to the community, because we were also invited to participate. But I think it also makes a huge difference to the people who live in the community, because these are also open to everybody. And I know it’s hard to do, you know, large scale, but I think the point here is that these interventions can be very effective when they’re at a community level, and a lot harder to implement, where they are at that sort of very high up state level.

38:06
Just nice to hear some positive stories. We

38:13
worked together a while ago on what works Scotland, which is a big project, and actually there’s lots of that project, talked about community anchor organisations and the role that community plays. One thing so my own research, I research lots of working age people, low income, precarious work, generally about employment support and social security. But through that, you hear stories and lives around what else they can’t participate in, and how the relationships change. Sometimes, when I hear the stories of communities that work all our picture is the invisible labour of the women often making those communities work. And one of the reasons why there’s fewer resources or fewer community activities in less well off neighbourhoods is that those women are still in paid work. So you talk about the generation, this pitching of generations, but actually working class people in the boomer generation often are still in work and are caring up and caring down, particularly women, so caring for elderly parents and for children and grandchildren. So if we build a society that the only way our communities thrive is through unpaid labour and the voluntary work, often of women. It’s not always women, but often retired people and women, then there’s always going to be disadvantage with those neighbourhoods where people still have to work and work in precarious work. Actually, there’s a big increase in men and women low income workers. The Wimpole project, which is a Glasgow women in multiple paid labour market. Wimple, which is Glasgow University project shows the pressures the Social Security system puts on low income women to take more and more hours in precarious work, cleaning hotels in the morning, being a dinner lady at lunchtime, doing other kinds of care work, and there’s no way then we can keep asking those individuals to hold our communities together. There has to. Be I also appreciate the voluntary work is good thing, but there has to be space in our welfare systems to have paid work, to value it enough to say this should be paid and valued, and this is important. And actually, some communities cannot backfill when austerity has cut these services. And we shouldn’t be expecting and if we are expecting them. We can’t be pushing them in the labour market to take on more and more hours for minimum wage jobs. We can’t have both. That is actually an answer to your question, which is, what can we do? I’ll just go another round.

40:33
Thank you for the contribution support. I want to take us down a psycho side path, and we’ll come back to the main topic in a bit, but I’m interested subhanna for this kind of first session is around inclusion and representation, and my work on LGBTQ communities often kind of presents a critique of some of these ideas about being included, being represented, being seen, being visible, how the intentions are often good. Intentions are often very positive, but sometimes for a variety of reasons. The reality of it can be harmful, it can be extractive, but singly, it can be quite exploitative. So I’m keen to hear in your experiences how whether inclusion and representation are the objectives that we should be aiming for, or whether it’s part of a broader package, whether inclusion being represented, being counted, is beyond end all, or actually other harms associated with that, particularly for minoritized communities, and that we should be speaking more about.

41:32
I mean, yes, that is a short answer. So I will say that, you know, this is a trap that I think we fell on, this representation trap quite a few years back, and I think we are digging ourselves out of it at this point, we’ve realised that having a sit at the table isn’t everything, or it isn’t enough that we really need, as a lot of colleagues were saying already, we need to meet people’s needs, and we need to allow them to thrive in their everyday lives before they can meaningfully take part in conversations and be part of decisions that are made about their lives. So obviously, absolutely, just being part of conversations, having a quota on a committee or steering group, which I know we’re all well aware of, it doesn’t do enough. It’s often tokenistic. It often comes with a lot of strings attached in terms of the resource and the time that’s put into specific projects. So what we really need is enough time to build relationships and to build trust and to allow people to feel safe, to even just kind of share what their realities are, and then once we’re at that point, then would be at a better place to maybe make decisions together. But I think what I really want to say is that what we need to change are these decision making structures, and we need to change them drastically, because they’ve not been put in place with young women in mind, or older people in mind, or, you know, they’ve been created by a very specific subset of the population, and we’re just trying to fit everyone else in there. It’s just not working, right? So I think we need to, like, radically change the system itself, the policy making system, the decision making structures. It’s a big, big project. I’m not too sure I could just now tell you how to do that, but I think that perhaps the first step is a cultural change that allows us to differentiate tokenistic, you know, kind of consultationy type processes from like, true, real collaboration, and then that allows us the time and the resources that we need to make it happen.

43:53
Yeah, nodding ahead more than just tinker around the edges, yeah, more

43:58
of a radical change.

44:00
Yes, I completely agree.

44:02
I also think that’s really important that we point out that inclusion and access are not the same thing. Because it might be fine to say we want to make sure that these different groups are represented. But actually, if you have geographical limitations or physical, physical, physical barriers, geographical barriers, financial barriers, or actually it just makes someone’s life a bit harder to participate then you didn’t do it well, and you didn’t do it in a way that was meaningful. So actually, I think sometimes we need to realise that we think of those as the same meaning, and they’re actually not the same thing, and doing it well means that it has to be both. I’ll say

44:42
something. Something just thinking out loud here, I’m interested. I’m glad that you brought up the new Scots language, because a recent project that I did got a cop was looking at migrant churches in Edinburgh, and we were kind of thinking about the a lot of the course. When we talk about Christianity in Scotland, it’s about language of decline. But actually, our research found that there are over 80 migrant, ethnic minorities and minority diaspora churches in Edinburgh alone. And Other research has shown that this is increasing, and a lot of the time when we talk about inclusion and access, the question has to become about who is inviting who, and what authority do they have to invite her to the table, right? The new scholar has also got this language I kind of pick up on, because it tends to frame migrants and refugees as something that, you know, you’re welcome into Scotland. You’re being like, you know, we are hospitable to you, you we are hosting you a guest. And also kind of frames them purely as people who can contribute economically or socially or culturally. But that’s a very extractive process, and it doesn’t take their participation on their own terms. And I think we can extrapolate that to other various minority and marginalised groups as well. It’s about who do we who’s asking who to participate, and what terms of those, what other you know, who’s dictating the terms of those positions participating? Sorry, as you were saying, like, you know, if it makes, like, you know, someone’s life harder, why would they be interested? Why they why would they want to kind of expose themselves to something that could be quite difficult, emotional, traumatic, etc, just, just picking up

46:13
on that. There’s also people who’s at the table. There are also people who are never at the table. So people who are sleeping rough, people who are experiencing homelessness, people who are in prison. And those people are never at the table. And I think we should be thinking more about

46:27
that sense of the kind of distinction between inclusion and access as well. Key points and anybody else’s work, we’ve seen this kind of tension about meaningful inclusion moving beyond kind of tokenistic approaches this type of work.

46:44
I think, I mean, I think one of the things I would say that in Scotland, Scotland has been better at than than England, is including organisations or representatives from organisations to help co produce services, and that Scottish Government has been things like the Adult Social

47:09
the adult disability, paper

47:11
disability payment co constructed with or the CO constructed with organisations of disabled people. So it’s much more involved. And I think that that sort of form of inclusion, and that form is it works relatively well within or works better than it did in the past. So I think that is something to to think that that’s a good thing, and it may be need to do more of it, and with more excluded groups, to look at building that participation. I also think that as well. You know, I’m not saying that representation is enough, but having representation is important. And I think that when you see, when you talk to young disabled people, seeing there’s really disabled politicians or television presenters and things, because this helps to a lot of their youth. Being told, you know, you can’t do that, this is not for you. This is not for you, and then seeing people who can do it. That’s not to say it’s not important. I agree that it’s not enough, but it is a good thing to see representation of no matter how little it is, but seeing that representation is important and does help tackle but I’m not not saying that it’s enough. You know, we need more in there.

48:30
Certainly, I think that a phrase. If you’re not at the table, you’re also on the menu, just getting around the table. Often that first step we’ve had, actually, surprisingly came to the end of our first session that has flown by no time at all, and we’re going to kind of continue some of these conversations in the second part of the roundtable discussion, where we’re going to be speaking, particularly about issues under the banner of polarisation and empathy. So we’ll be seeing a little bit more about this kind of the challenge of polarised communities, a sense of kind of individualization, how that manifests in a variety of ways, but also trying to think about where do we go from here? So I was delighted there were some kind of practical, action oriented ideas in our current discussion about, what can we push for promote head of the election next May, what sort of things work, and particularly around empathy, around emotion, around feeling things we often don’t speak enough about. How are these aspects of society really key to kind of responding to and pushing back against this period of polarisation. So we’ll take about 10 minutes recharge with these coffees, and then we’ll continue the conversation at about 4pm No.

1:00:18
Certain things, okay, we will restart. Second session. Most people are feeling refreshed after that short break. So we’re back for the second part of our roundtable today, and our very kind of loose banner for this part of the discussion is from polarisation to empathy, the broad descriptor, and we’ve been speaking about some of these themes already in the first part of the discussion today. But for my first question, I wanted to have a think about the idea of polarisation in particular. So we hear a lot about a polarised society, about this kind of gap that’s distant between different parts of our communities, different parts of all that makes up Scotland. So I’m keen to hear from you, from your experience and your kind of the work that you do, what do you see as the driving factors behind the social, political and economic polarisation, and how does this manifest in different parts of Scotland today? I’ll give us a second or so to think about that, and keep the hearing results on the massive culprit of polarisation in Scotland right now, it is a problem. I mean, maybe we’re maybe we’re dumping the gun is

1:01:33
polarisation, which is a problem because we’ve got all people pitted against young people. And I think we should have a lot more integration. I think we should have a lot more cooperation between the two, because both can offer a lot. And I think it’s a shame to sort of say that the old people are this and the young people are that. Why not bring them together? And I would vote for somebody. Let’s say, let’s have some integration. Take, for example, housing. There’s a real shortage of housing for old people, a real shortage of housing for younger people. Why can we not have some exciting architect who designs a wonderful new town for all people, young people, living together, and we can all help one another out. If you look at the experience, we’ve got the background we’ve got we could, you know, my husband, for example, is tutoring immigrants and how to do job interviews. We could give them all that sort of stuff, all that sort of information that we have got. And the young people could offer us, you know, here’s dynamic young people, still alive, still you know, doing this next to create some excitement in our life. So I think we need to bring them together.

1:02:42
And I just, I also wonder whether anybody we disagree with the idea it’s such a fantastic opportunity.

1:02:48
People are going to something concrete. When are we going to get the government to start building these housing

1:02:57
what’s stopping this from happening? What are the barriers they’re stopping this intergenerational housing, these kind of opportunities,

1:03:03
what tradition we’re stuck in? The old, funny daddy ways of doing things. We did this in the 1950s let’s do it again in 2026 I think we need radical change, and I would vote for somebody who’s going to give me a radical change, as long as

1:03:21
he’s not reformed. For me, I think one of the biggest causes of polarisation is poverty. I think that that’s what separates communities, and that’s what separate and if we want to tackle, you know, you look at people who are attracted to sort of anti immigrant parties or to that it, it’s located around areas of poverty and people who felt left behind. And you know Falkirk, where you can see these, these communities are being left behind, and they got hit by the 2010 and then subsequent they’ve just never caught back up to to where they were. And I think if we you know, it’s simple, it is a simple fact that, and then how do you tackle that poverty, and how do you bring that’s the key question. Because I think that’s the to me, that’s the cause of polarisation. If we want to look at it, and we can tamper, we can go around at the edges of looking at, how do we bring this community to that community, but it’s poverty that’s at the root of it.

1:04:23
So spotted Haley Liz and Mars, we’ll go Haley first.

1:04:27
I’m going to be slightly challenged what you said, only because if we think of reform as a right wing party or a far right or whatever language wants to tag on them, they’re actually a real mixed bag of people, and some being quite well off conservative voters, so they’ve scooped up the kind of right of the Conservative Party, at least the leadership sits in that more elite space of policy ideas, as well as contributors and leaders are they then using a certain polarising discourse to attract votes from under invested. Localities. So I don’t keep saying folk, and that’s true. And I think part of the reason why people buy into this discourse, or at least believe it, is that people are feeling wealth inequality quite acutely, and have done for a very long while. So we’ve had a prolonged cost of living crisis. There’s been lots of policy failures to address the causes of why people’s incomes are so low, why we can’t afford the basics that stagnated wages, we’ve got high use of employment levels. There’s a whole heap of economic issues that have been polarising and have led to more inequality that’s made vulnerable ground for this kind of discourse to thrive. And that isn’t just a British thing. It’s not Scottish thing. You see it in across across Europe. You see it obviously in America. But there’s you watch the news, there’s all these uprisings and different things going on, and it’s a bigger issue than simply the fact that the working classes, I really begrudge the idea that all the working class are right wing. So I would, I mean, now obviously I’m in a fancy room right now with a semi fancy job, because we’re always at threat redundancy. You know, I’m from a working class background, from a working class town, city, officially, and with the family of working class people that were proactive in politics and engaged in issues around equality and inequality, and there’s not a dearth of that conversation in working class places. Whether we’ve been having the same conversations as the middle classes and the upper classes, probably not all the time, but I think we’ve lost some of those spaces for those conversations, and people are feeling distant from Westminster politics and decision making. And I don’t think there’s been a very good job of communicating what is austerity, what has been the austerity project? Why is it still going on under a slightly different name? Who are the winners and losers? And why are you a loser in this game? And therefore, what politics do you need to engage in to make you more of a winner? And I think someone’s offered people a very shorthand, persuasive argument that the reason, the way you become a winner again, is, is this kind of polarising rhetoric about and that’s not actually, I think actually, as academic here, maybe we’ve all partly failed as well our institutions and our practices and professions. You know, we do knowledge exchange. We’ve had talks, you know, we took out an appointment all the time. We’ve social policy conferences. I’ve not been to social I’ve not been to work in men’s club and presented. I’ve not been to and I could have done right and maybe I should have done it, maybe as a profession. And others in this kind of field, the think tanks, others are we actively include, I know it’s online right now, but like are we actively saying that these are conversations for everyone and not just for us, and in which case, then facts and data and research become something that is shared so people are less vulnerable to discuss shorthand rhetoric and answers of really complex economic problems and Debt and all these other things that are limiting policy choices and innovations. Yeah, so I think that’s part of what is the polarising. I don’t think it is just the working classes. You know, there’s an awful lot of middle class people are part of the right wing reform movement and and wealthy elites. It’s just sort of pitched as these are angry, working class people. I don’t think that’s fair. I don’t think it’s

1:08:24
accurate. Liz, okay, I’m

1:08:27
going to slightly take off my third age trust, but it’s the hat, but slightly to do with it. Sometimes change is brought about by small, little acts. And my previous life, I was in education in Glasgow, always worked in Glasgow for 38 years. One of the things that we did, and I don’t know if anybody from Strathclyde is here, Strathclyde University doesn’t matter. That’s and it was Strathclyde University Education Department, and one of the things we introduced, and it’s about poverty, is intergenerational mentoring, and it was enabling young people to take access of all the contextual things that I was, you know, if I’m mentoring a young person and they’re in, you know, a poor area, background, whatever, never, nobody in their family have been to university, but they want to go to university, or they want to get a good job. They want to do as well as possible at school. Then somebody of our generation coming in and mentoring them, maybe once a fort, not in a kind of patronising way, but just being alongside and, you know, I used to think, oh, they wouldn’t like older people coming and It’d be terrible. It was great. Did it. I did it for number of years when I was working in spring burn Academy, and that worked well. And now I’m on the other side. I’m a volunteer, and it’s working with because people are always ambitious. People always want better, but it’s just knowing how to access that better, I think, is sometimes the complexity and sometimes. Change is just brought about by small acts and small groups of people. Not necessarily, I know, I know. I think the internet’s really meant that Nigel Farage made, I guess, far too much airspace. But you know what I mean? It’s sometimes it’s just these small things. It makes a difference in individuals lives, until

1:10:22
that’s very nice and very hopeful. So I think that, for me, polarisation is being underpinned perhaps by like a sense of individualism that we are really struggling to come out of that mindset that, for instance, rights are like a finite resource, that if you gain what rights I will lose my own. So that’s a very dangerous lie that I think has become, kind of like, I believe generally in society, that we need to try and challenge the same way empathy. We want it to talk a little bit of empathy as well. It’s the same way. You know, empathy is also not a resource that will run out. You don’t need to feel empathy only for those people that are like you or that you can relate to directly, or that you can really understand that experience. We should be able to promote empathy as something that, you know, there’s enough to go around, right? And we’ve got to understand that if we take Scotland and people as a collective and that we will all be better off. So I think what case was saying earlier on of like we’re investing not necessarily in individuals, but in a community, in housing. We’ve mentioned housing a few times, right? If everyone has affordable, accessible housing, if everyone’s well fed, if everyone’s got like, an occupation in a community that they’re part of. So I guess, yeah, that’s some of the thoughts on like, why is polarisation thriving? What are the kind of like narratives that we can promote culturally in our different context to overcome it.

1:12:01
Thank you. And Jason, your answer there as well, you actually touched on some of the questions we’ve received from those joining us online, and one was around this idea of, how do we get past idea that rights are either or me having more rights, taking away your rights? How do we move beyond that type of thinking and linked to that somebody else online is also explored the idea that, can we engage with people who have different views and should be people who have very different views? Is there a way to navigate the kind of barrier between people just writing them off as too different from my views? Or other ways we can kind of cross these divides so both in the point of polarisation and then these questions online, Katie here, if anybody has any reflections or thoughts

1:12:43
on it. So I think rights really is cultural shift. And so from having worked on the NCRC act the past couple of years, before it passed last year, which for the acronym is the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, the UK had ratified the ratified the NCRC in 1819, 91 so we were already signed up to it. We should have already been doing the things in it, but it became legally enforced through Scottish courts. But actually the real change to the act was never, it is about access to justice in courts, but actually, really it’s about that cultural shift and recognising that rights are inherent and they’re everybody’s business, and actually everybody should know about them, know how to ensure that they’re upheld. Competing rights absolutely do exist, but you know, they’re not the majority of circumstances. And actually it’s interesting to have conversations about that where, for example, a parent’s right might certainly conflict with what a child’s wishes are, but that’s that’s okay, and as we what we were expecting to see in this Parliament, but hopefully we will see in the next is a human rights bill for Scotland, which incorporates a further four treaties, plus the right to a healthy environment. And hopefully when we see that come in, there’ll be a lot, there’ll be kind of a much broader cultural sort of cross Scotland discourse around what rights look like, what these what this legislation would mean for Scotland, and actually what, what it looks like if the if your rights aren’t met, and doing something about it? Because I feel like people feel very disenfranchised with seeing my rights aren’t being met, and how do I do something about it? Because at the moment, it’s very difficult in a lot of cases, and also the point of polarisation, I think, has to be mentioned. We have, we’ve kind of touched a little bit on anti immigration sentiment and racism, I think, have been in a number of spaces the past couple of months where we talk about it as if racist. As if racism is new in Scotland, and as if it’s new concepts. My granddad moved to Scotland from Mauritius in 1967 1968 moved to Paisley, married a white a white woman from Paisley, and experienced a huge amount of racism. I mean, really, quite, quite challenging throughout his life, throughout my dad’s life, I’ve experienced it throughout my life. It’s not new. What we’ve seen is a shift in the narrative about it and the attention

1:14:47
we give it, and

1:14:51
yes, it has a significant increased media presence. But actually, it’s important to remember at the same time that this isn’t new. We have. Used immigrants and people of other ethnicities as skateboards for a very long time in the UK.

1:15:09
Yeah, I think that’s very interesting, because there is a kind of Scottish National imaginary of us progressive nation, and that’s been something the last my privilege, the last sort of 50 years of being this kind of discourse of progressiveness, and yet, underpinning that underneath that is a lot of lack of policies are not that progressive. And so we are one of the highest have had one of the highest imprisonment rates in Europe. Still, even though we, we profess to be this progressive nation and compassionate justice. And I think there are many things about Scottish society that we have not always faced up to that we need to, and they are long standing problems. And I think this notion of that our national imaginary is also something about, how do we describe ourselves as a nation? It’s also an important sort of story that we need to, let me remake

1:15:59
now, certainly ahead of election, the story, how do we imagine ourselves, the story we tell about ourselves this kind of imagination, and whether that reflects reality of daily life in all parts of Scotland?

1:16:10
Yes. So I think one thing we haven’t really mentioned, and I think it’s key in driving polarisation, is social media, and the fact that once you start engaging with certain type of content, this is all you get, and then that will modify and solidify your opinions and also drive them in one direction or the other. And also to address the question about whether we should talk to people of different opinions, I strongly believe we should. And one of the, I think one of the issues we identify now is as the polarisation problem is that people are no longer willing because these identities that they adopt, whether it be right wing or left wing, become so entrenched and so strong that it is no longer, you know, talking to another person. It is talking to a member of an out group, and then, by default, you reject that, because those opinions are in direct contradiction to what you believe is the only true thing, right? And this is sort of also where I think empathy, and in particular perspective taking which is sort of the more cognitive aspect of empathy, which is being able to you you don’t have to feel the same thing that that other person is feeling, but you understand where you’re coming from and why they may be saying the things that they do, which we’ve already expressed around the table here as well, by saying, okay, you know, Maybe you know, people are experiencing, I don’t know, poverty, right? And who are looking for an explanation, right? It is an easy explanation, and then it’s easier to understand that maybe that’s this is not necessarily a bad person who has these opinions. It is a person who’s in a difficult situation. And they found a fairly easy answer because somebody tells them that, you know, it’s easier to blame the immigrant than to understand that, you know, maybe wealth distribution is becoming more unequal, and people who are better off are unwilling, say, to pay more taxes so that, you know, everybody can benefit. So, yeah, I think perspective taking is one of the things we can try to use to better engage with other points of view, and then maybe also try to see how we can come together as a community to address those issues.

1:18:32
Thank you. Thank you for picking up that question online about how can we can we engage others with very different viewpoints? I’m keen to give others have thoughts.

1:18:42
I just want to say we cannot emphasise empathy if there is fear in the community. And this is what I’ve noticed from the media nowadays, like fear has been invested a lot towards against the others, which is the immigrants and people are afraid. They have the right to be afraid, but because there is lack of positive evidence of what these makers have been doing in the country, what’s their contribution? So maybe the organisation are more more focused on the goal oriented, but there is a lot of lack of data there what they have been doing. What’s the good thing? Was it so the only the people only see the negative side, which the politic, politicians take us as a Pete whenever there is a problem blaming the weak group. So this is one of the problems. So we we can emphasise over empathy when we can, I mean, improve the news that spreading around. Thank you.

1:19:45
I think such an important contribution, this idea that it’s not a level playing field, this expectation people are the power imbalances between these different communities and different groups, and idea of fear and all these things that are kind of affecting the ability to be involved in conversation. Things. So any other thoughts, reflections on that?

1:20:03
Yes, I wanted to add on that point as well around, I think part of the question as well as, how does empathy then translate into collective identities and collective action as well? Because I think sometimes empathy becomes a kind of end point in and of itself, and actually can be used as a kind of just a vehicle for polarisation, you know. So I think there’s, you know, people kind of say I feel for this, you know, a community different from themselves, but, you know, in reflection, my own condition. So I think in some ways, empathy, I think it’s quite a sometimes dangerously abstract term as well, in terms of how does that translate into concrete action. So that’s some hesitancy. I’m hopeful. I mean, I would hope for some super

1:20:50
that’s very helpful. I both conversation into about what to speak about was around this idea of kind of culture, feelings, emotion, empathy. Are these the answer to the problem of polarisation, or as a part of a bigger strategy, you mean you’d be speaking more about emotion, more about feelings, more about how we relate to others. And in your work, have you kind of trialled anything’s methods and seen success or not success in the work that

1:21:16
you’ll do? Success, I think in the u3 A and the members say, and we’ve got 3000 members in Edinburgh, they say that the youth rea has saved them. It saved them from loneliness. It saved them from sitting at home just doing nothing and becoming depressed. It’s given them a social network, which at old age is so important, and I think there’s a lot of evidence to show that that social network is imperative for older people. You’ve got to keep out. You’ve got to keep meeting people. You’ve got to keep your brain alive. And the u3 works. It really does work to that extent. So like minded people are being brought together and engaged. And the feeling of trust in the organisation, and a feeling of it’s giving me something I really, really want.

1:21:57
For anyone familiar with youth, unfamiliar with you three, could you maybe say a brief

1:22:01
your words? We’ve been around for about 40 something years. We were founded by Michael Young and Eric midwinter. Eric midwinter has just died, and these were sociologists, and they retired, and they thought, wow, we’re not ready to sort of retire yet, sort of Sydney armchair and knit socks. We still want to learn, we still want to engage, we still want to be active, and they formed the first u3 a in Cambridge. I thought it was Cambridge, wasn’t it? Cambridge? And they thought it would just be a small organisation, but it’s blossomed. We now have over 1000 u3 A’s throughout the country. We’ve got about what? How many 1000 members, 420 420,000 members, and 3000 they say, in Edinburgh. And it just, it just is so successful, because people are coming together and doing things that give a very rich, fulfilled Third Age. And it works.

1:22:55
I suppose it’s for the members. By the members. If I run a Spanish class, I don’t get paid. Nobody who’s a used VA person gets paid. So I run the Spanish class, and people come along and, do you know what I mean? It’s self help, which I think is very important.

1:23:11
I think the self help, yes, it’s cooperative and self help, very much. Self Help, but it’s great. You’ve got, you know, in my art group, I’ve got retired architect, I’ve got some professional artists, I’ve got people who’ve never drawn in their life before, and we all meet in a wonderful facility down North Edinburgh centre. Has anybody been down there? Brand new, beautiful facility with theatre, with music, recording studios, with art studios. You’ve got the local community coming in for lunch, which costs about two pounds, and it’s just they come together and they share their experiences, they share their wealth of knowledge, which is what we have in abundance in the old age, and nobody recognises it except the youth three,

1:23:53
a real kind of clear connections, empathy across different

1:23:58
I think, I mean, I think there are similar models employed in other sectors with other groups. I think of the work of Glasgow disability Alliance, for example, in their days that they run, where groups of young disabled people come together, disabled people from ethnic minorities, disabled people who are refugees and asylum seekers and share ideas. And it’s not about doing art club. It’s about sharing experiences and coming together, talking and building friendships. I think that that is, to me, there’s building communities of interest. And sometimes those communities of interest are built around communities of identity, and other times they’re built around a shared interest. But again, that’s, you know, goes back to, I think Haley’s point that she made about having the resource to be able to participate. And these, all these, all cost resource to get to, you know, getting to North, if you live in South Edinburgh, getting to North Edinburgh might be difficult. And so getting there’s that ability to participate.

1:24:59
We have a group in. Of Edinburgh in

1:25:04
Glasgow, disability Alliance. It’s one place, but they pay taxes. They have accessible taxis to bring all the members in who want to come in. So that’s part of the funding. Is it pays because it recognises that disability will cost a lot of money to travel. So they’ll bring in people. And I think that’s part of that thing. It’s about bringing people communities together, but giving people the ability

1:25:26
to come together. As the key, as I see both Mar and Leo are.

1:25:31
So I just wanted to share our model, which I think is very, very similar. And I do think the third sector has this down, like, we know how to do co design like really well from the outset. So at the young women’s movement, we are created by with young women. So we’ve got a variety of programmes, plus research, plus policy work, and everything that we do starts and ends with young women. So we’ve got staying groups that we recruit freely online, mainly or from our network of young women that want to be involved in, like a specific project, and they lead it from the beginning. So it’s not this model in which you call them up and you ask us very specific questions, you bring them onto a room, you give them the time to explore and to tell you, this is what we think we should be looking into. This is what we should be striving for. And then from that moment onwards, they are driving the whole thing. And so it’s, it’s true experience on change making, which is what I think that everyone at all ages and in all situations should be able to do. So yeah, that’s, that’s our contribution. But I’m pretty sure that other organisations in the third sector know how to do this really, really well. And again, to highlight what they’ve already said, it is a resource that we’re lacking in the landscape is becoming more and more like harder for us to provide everything that’s needed, you know, travel expenses, some incentives, you know, lunches and most important, have, like, a strong team that’s got like, stability and is able to do their jobs the best that that they can. So, yeah, thank you.

1:27:11
We were talking in the break about arts and creativity and actually the role that they can play in discourse. And I think that’s a really important one, because when you’re talking to people about issues that feel really tense and difficult to talk about and it’s hard to connect with people. Actually being able to do that through, whether it’s through music or or or crafts or whatever it might be, is a really nice way of breaking down some of those barriers. And kind of you don’t be good. It doesn’t have to be a masterpiece, but actually, um, providing those safe spaces to have those conversations, it can be a much more conducive environment to having and when you do have those kind of opposing views and breaking down some of those barriers and saying, Well, we’re actually working towards this is, this is what I’m looking at, and this is what we’re working towards, and finding commonalities in that, I think it’s it’s easier than sitting two people down on seats across from each other and saying, Well, what do you find? Something you agree on, because that’s not going to be the most productive.

1:28:10
As you said in the beginning. You said about empathy. It’s like emotion, and we cannot tell it’s not tangible, and we should, like deal with it as structure to actually make it like, tangible and feel like if we prioritise creative spaces, like we prioritise libraries, will be we have like, more open spaces to share experiences and have more empathy between Different communities, and then we can then translate it into data. And then people, we can can see what’s the differences can make and how we can understand each other through these these spaces. Yeah, yeah.

1:28:55
Thank you. And my my work is on data deification, metrics, quantification, and I do find that the challenge is, how do we, if we’re reporting to funder, we’re applying for funding, how do we capture all of these amazing projects, initiatives, and turn it into numbers, turn it into kind of metrics, and that kind of gap between two semester role within my work as well, Lesley

1:29:16
Casey’s trying to get No, I was Just

1:29:20
going to add, from the think tank perspective, how we are attempting to engage so called experts of experience in all our research. So before we get into a project, one, how can we involve people who this issue directly affects the focus groups? Or, I think Leah could maybe talk to this one parent family Scotland, we’ve been collaborating on a child maintenance project. We’ve had a single parent expert group, advisory group, so yeah, that’s very much something that we in Think Tank space are thinking through and trying to apply in all our studies and work

1:29:54
pick up on the notion of empathy. And I was at an event yesterday. University, which was talking about the difference between empathy and compassion, which I thought was a subtle difference, but the compassion is also something that’s really important, because compassion acknowledges suffering. And when I in my own field in criminal justice, I get slightly angsty when we start talking about emotions and all of this, because the emotive, the emotional aspect of this is we punish, and actually what we need is data that seems to be, you know, about what really is effective, and trying to make that less passionate. But on the other hand, we need to have compassion and understanding and emotional connection to people who have come into conflict with the law and we don’t understand. And many of the young people that we work with in our research are people who have come from incredibly traumatic backgrounds. It’s early trauma coming from very deprived backgrounds, including families with violence, and they need our compassion. And so it’s important to have emotion, but not emotion in this kind of field. And one of the things, I think, is there was a very lovely quote from the 1944 edition of The Guardian. Somebody was writing about, how do you deal with young people, who are, you know, have done terrible things. And he’s talking about the fact that it’s not so much the furniture in a youth services group, it’s actually the workers themselves. And there’s something about public service workers as well as third sector public service workers that need to be nurtured and supported, properly trained, well resourced, equally third sector. And the real worry thing that for me and listening some of the things have been said about third sector is there’s fantastic practice, but nobody is able to evaluate it properly, because they don’t have the resource to do that, and therefore fantastic practice often disappears. And small things, small services often go because they can’t demonstrate working. So there’s all sorts of tensions

1:31:54
picking up. The thing about the small events alongside the resourcing has come up quite a lot.

1:32:00
Yeah, I just wanted to raise a question about, How do we ask people who are experts with experience to talk about their experiences in a way that’s not extractive or re traumatising them? So in my own experience, my own research, working with migrant refugee women, it’s, you know, it’s always a balance, because in one sense, I want to give space and a platform for them to voice their experiences. At the same time, I, as a researcher, I’m gaining something from this, a PhD, a piece of work, etc, etc, even if it’s done for the benefit of the people that I’m trying to work with. There is that tension where I’m asking people to, like, Tell me about a difficult time in your life, and then I’ll write it, and then hopefully I’ll do something good about it, but then you may not actually benefit from it. So I’d be curious to know if you know if other people within these kind of situations or experiences have kind of them, suggestions or ideas, or how do we be empathetic and ask you to share experiences without being extractive?

1:32:54
Thank you. I’m very keen to hear because I also struggle with that my work. Thank you. Communities and communities, which are very over researched in some ways, telling, often very traumatic Karen stories and Christina.

1:33:06
I was just thinking around what we were talking earlier about data and things. And a lot of policy making is based on, it’s kind of the gold standard of evidence based policy making, but a lot of it is very large, quantitative data and a lot of the nuance around emotion and empathy, and what we’re talking about here is something that you get at small scale through qualitative studies, through things like this. And there’s maybe why some of the problems that some of the third sector organisations are facing is that they’re working with smaller numbers. And it’s question then, of like, what gets prioritised in terms of what gets the attention? And, yeah, what gets prioritised?

1:33:52
Basically, I think to come back to what norm was talking about, and Casey touched on the piece of work that we’ve done about shell maintenance. It’s probably a really good example of how you do that well. So we know that for parents living with for resident and non resident parents, the child maintenance system doesn’t work for isn’t fit for purpose in the way that it needs to be. And so what we did with this piece of work is that they were absolutely at the centre. From the beginning, it’s been a bit empowerment. I think that’s probably, yeah, yeah. So we’ve worked with parents to design a system that looks that’s what they need, understanding the kind of very technical side, but also, like the engagement around it has been with them. We’ve made sure that they have everything they need to do, that they’ve had support through our services. It’s not been, it’s not been about extraction at all. It’s about like, let’s hold your hand while we walk through this together and actually make some meaningful change. And that’s not easy. That takes a lot of resource and a lot of time. But actually at the end of that, what we could have is a redesigned system and parents who can, who can put their hand up and say, I was, I was a part of that, but in a way, that’s really me. Meaningful. And where that gets tricky is where you have a shorter term piece of work or where you have something that doesn’t have the kind of capacity to do that. But when you can do something about it’s really quite powerful, and it gives people opportunities who might never have a similar opportunity to that in their life, to do something that they can say, I’m, you know, I’m really proud of what I’ve done here.

1:35:23
And just to come back to the empathy of the street level workers, kind of discussion, which I agree with, although there’s probably, like two, two issues, I guess, from our research, from a long for a long while, has been if street level workers can’t change the structures and policies that they have to implement, right, and they’re doing this with minimal resources, even being a nice person with empathy still won’t stop the force of the policy hitting the person coming through the door. So if a job centre worker has to sanction someone, because that’s the rule that’s officially the law, then being a nice person and empathetic won’t lessen the sting that benefit conditionality will place on the individual. And then the second thing is, a lot of my work at the moment is about the rise of digital interfaces in the delivery of the welfare state. These are decisions that don’t involve a human at the street level anymore. So actually does the empathy about the street level, or is the empathy needed in upstream policy making? Is it the systems designers that are very far from some of the claimants that come in through the door and the social issues that the designing services to support, is it about the kind of elite policy makers like this was a question rather than answering, but here it’s like when we think about where empathy needs to be, and compassion and sympathy and things, I think a lot of street level workers probably have that because they’re so close to people’s social issues. But do the others are less visible in the system? And is that the spaces that actually more investment needs to be made into how to get those software designers based in IBM, based in London, to deal in to design an interface for a social care recipient based in Aberdeenshire or wherever? I’ve just made those places up, but like, Yeah, I think these are the kind of nitty gritty for thinking about, well, you have to weave empathy into the system. It might not be always. It is sometimes the street level workers, but it’s it’s also those people with power

1:37:11
that sits somewhere else, yeah, where in the system we need more empathy, more emotion, more feeling. I’m going to kind of take us to we’re almost reaching the final stretch. Somewhat amazingly, we’ve got about 20 minutes long. 20 minutes left, and I want to kind of pose a really horrible question to you all. Hopefully it’ll be interesting and exciting. I want you to imagine it’s next May. It’s the morning after the election, right? And you’ve woken up, you’re the leader of the biggest heart thing in Holyrood. Man of man to Parliament. I want you to think in the discussion we’ve had this afternoon, what kind of policy programme or initiatives is going to really bring about change if you have the magic wand, money is no object. Politics is no object. What’s one thing? One One thing you think will really shift the dial in terms of the challenges we spoke about today. It might be about polarisation, it might be about exclusion, it might be about lack of representation. What do you think politicians should be doing come next week to really shift the dial like a few seconds to think, but an answer is a tough one. Yeah. Is

1:38:25
there anything that will shift the title?

1:38:31
I’m not sure about thinking about this. I’m not sure, but I think I’m not criticising human rights based approaches, which I think are very important. I’m not criticising the not criticising the human rights but I’d like to see more focus on equality, because I think there’s, you know, we’ve had the self directed support. Scotland was 2014 it was a human rights based approach to social care. It’s made very little difference to the delivery of social care. Changes in the Mental Health Act in Scotland are framed around human rights, and it’s not made. Research suggests it’s not made that significant difference. And I think that there’s a need to move back to saying it’s actually inequality. You can say we’ve all got human rights, and then there’s massive inequality that goes on above. We get those basic rights, and there’s massive inequality that goes on above. And I think there’s a need to start talking back to equality. And I don’t mean equality of opportunity. I mean looking at equality of outcome, and looking back to saying it’s about how do what are the ways that we do it? And I’m a big advocate of Amar to sends idea of capabilities, and I think it’s looking at what are the capabilities that we need to give we need to allow people to get to achieve that, but also what are the resources that we have to put in place to act as conversion factors, to help people realise those capabilities and and to turn them into into ways that they change themselves. So I. I would think that a shift to a more to a greater focus on equality rather than rights, would would be, I think,

1:40:11
I don’t think this will solve every problem, but invest in social infrastructure, give us affordable housing, give us fair pay for all, give us free transport, give us the basics that we need to build upon after that.

1:40:29
This is funding those fundamentals. Yeah,

1:40:34
I believe that we cannot be doing the same thing and expecting expecting different results. So the infrastructure itself. Whenever I go and see organisations, I see the board members. I see the ones who are very doing the decision making. There is no barriers. There is youth that I cannot see youth people. There cannot see creative people, only. The same minds, the same opinions. That’s why we have the same output. But if you have more different varieties, from immigrant background, from Creative background, from minority background, this is will actually have different opinion, different experience, and this is what actually enriching the outcome.

1:41:16
And this is when we solve the problem,

1:41:19
and this is who’s in the room, kind of making decisions, what kind of expertise and speaking experience are we bringing these conversations? Thank you.

1:41:26
Yes, I’m gonna have to say a

1:41:27
minimum income guarantee. So the minimum income guarantee looks like a minimum standard of income that families need to have a not just the essentials, but like

1:41:37
some quality of life. And I think because

1:41:42
that comes not just on Social Security, but a balance of employment various income sources, I think if we ensured that everyone in Scotland had at least what their their minimum level and the minimum income guarantee, we would address a lot of the issues we see, because people wouldn’t feel so marginalised and like they were fighting against a system that wasn’t working for them,

1:42:04
like a real, kind of clear, kind of programme there.

1:42:08
Lesley, yeah, so, I mean, I think I agree with everything that’s been saying that we probably haven’t yet got over covid, and that we talk about inequalities. There’s been a huge intensification of inequalities since then. And as I was saying earlier, mental health issue that’s massive in this country, and communities have really suffered and been over policed. And I think there’s so much that we have to do in Northfield to pick up kind of issues that are arisen from that. And one of the things I would want to see a new government doing, and if I were in charge, I would be wanting to happen is that actually different policy portfolios would work together, because what happens, and certainly in my field, criminal justice, it’s not a criminal the best way of dealing with criminal justice is through health, through education, through the economy, through housing, all of those things are linked together, and we are not very good at Working across government. If we could get that right things, we were better.

1:43:07
I think education as well is important. I would invest in education, education. Education. Was it Tony Blair, but I think the gifted for the what to call it, the Curriculum for Excellence, was a fiasco. It wasn’t funded. It wasn’t resourced. I think covid has had a dreadful effect on behaviour in schools. I really would invest in education and make sure it’s education for 2000 and 20s, 2000 and 30s, 2000 and 80s, because I don’t think we’re teaching children what they really need, and we’re sending far too many children up to do courses that that really are not they’re not fitted for. What about our plumbers and builders and designers and creative people? I don’t think they’re catered for. I lived in Norway for a while, and the system there is superb. And Italy, even Italy, has got a wonderful education system as well. I don’t know why we don’t look at other systems and take what’s best from them. We’re still stuck again. You know, years ago, decades ago, when we first thought we were really good at education in Scotland, but I don’t think we’re doing a good job now.

1:44:12
Thank you. And again, just come back. Said the start meeting, sitting at this table and grandstanding. I think for like First Minister, somewhat, it’s great to hear all these amazing kind of suggestions and ideas. Just I want to say that the kind of the conversation today, it’s been recorded, as we know, it’s been streamed after the discussion. The plan is RSE to take these insights and ideas and suggestions and turn them into a report, or some kind of output from discussion today. And so I’ve got one more kind of question I want to kind of pose for everyone, and actually an open ended question. And we’ve been here now for just under two hours. I’m sure many of you came today with some notes, some ideas, some things you want to get across in the conversation today. So I’ve left about 10 minutes at the end of our session, just for anything that maybe you thought. Would come up with discussion and hasn’t anything that you were burning to say, I didn’t quite have the chance really, to open the floor for you to say that before opening the floor, I just want to ask, is there anything online would be to kind of bring into the conversation at all? Oh, good. All good. So yes, we have about 10 minutes left. So there’s no real question or promise here. It’s just things which you thought might have come up. It might be about the first but we spoke in the first part of the day, or it might be about our topic in the second part, any kind of closing remarks or concluding thoughts on the discussion we’ve had.

1:45:33
Yeah, I suppose

1:45:34
it’s just that, you know, we’re still many months away at this. I mean, not that many, but you know, we still have months to go until the election, and there are things we can do to engage these groups, the groups the groups that we’ve talked about is not being engaged. And it isn’t too late to do that. It isn’t always easy to do that. But actually I think, I think it’s really important that we do the best we can to engage as many people from us, as many different kinds of backgrounds and opinions as possible.

1:46:00
I think it speaks to what you mentioned earlier. Haley spoke to me as well about the sense of being reflexive and power that many of us have at this table, whether it’s research policy in the third sector, and the stuff that I could be doing between now and May kind of help shift some of these conversations.

1:46:15
Yes, if I could talk about the religious elephant in the room, I think so, you know, my research is on Christianity. It’s a migrant Christians. It’s on Scottish nationalism and Christian nationalism as well. And I think when we’re thinking about the future of Scotland, I think it’s very important to remember that there is a religious element in a religious voice, in a religious majority or minority, that needs to be considered in some way. So my short term research project that I did most recently, the Centre for theology and public issues, looked at ethnic minority Christians and ideas of Scottish belonging to the nation. And there was a very, very small sense in which they felt they weren’t able to openly speak about their faith out of fear, out of desire to be respectful to other religions. And I think that poses quite interesting questions for when we talk about ideas around social cohesion, inclusion within politics, we know that, like you know, religious nationalism is on the rise. We know that it can be very harmful, very divisive. But at the same time, for the ethnic minority Christians, I was looking at when they faced experiences of racism discrimination, which still persisted despite Scotland’s image or self understanding as a very welcoming country, they drew on their religious identity in order to find comfort, either whether that’s with ethnic minority churches that they went to, or a sense of greater belonging to the overall body of believers around the world. So I think religion is sometimes posited as a barrier to belonging, but actually I think in some of the research that I’m doing, and others are doing as well, it can actually be utilised, if done well, as a way in which people can feel like they belong. So the Christians I’m speaking to, they feel like they want to do to do well in Scotland. They want Scotland to do well. They care about Scotland. They participate in food banks. They participate in looking after members of the community. They welcome migrants in because they’re motivated by their religious faith. And I think when we have these kind of conversations around Scotland’s Future, and who gets to participate in Scotland, we do need to engage with the voices of religious people. Of course, the tension is, then, you know, when visions of what Scotland looks like that’s motivated by religion counters or acts with other ideas around equality and all that kind of stuff, which is something that which I think actually just makes it more important that we need to have these kind of healthy dialogues and empathetic and conversations.

1:48:25
Any other concluding thoughts or things that happened, kind of Karen conversation so

1:48:29
far, sorry, I’ve been speaking so much guys. Sorry, I’m gonna just end by going back to young women, which is who I came here to, kind of represent, and talk about talking about recitation. So I just want to say that young women are not just the future of Scotland. They are citizens of Scotland now, and we should be treating them as such. I also want to say that inclusion, like I said earlier, is about who’s in the room, but not just about who’s in the room. It’s about whose futures are being vested in at the moment. And finally, just like a bit of hope for not just the run up to elections, but also after that, that we don’t just come here and have like a real love conversation and goodbye and never see you again, but that we take these opportunities to build true alliances that are going to allow us to to improve, things to work towards the things that we’ve all kind of discussed, that we want to see, you know, improving and being better. So I do hope that I see you all in that we can work together in the future as well, across sectors, public sector, academia, everyone, because I’ll definitely make us stronger.

1:49:45
Since it’s kind of recent, speaking of polarisation, but also, there’s a need for the connections among all of us. People in the organisation represents

1:49:54
just one comment. I mean, also, while we are thinking about how. To fix. We also need to think about what, what might what we.