« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
CHAPTER FOUR : SERVICE IMPROVEMENT PRIORITIES: WORKSHOP FINDINGS
INTRODUCTION
4.1 Across all locations, demands for service improvements were largely realistic and practical. In some instances the accessibility improvements required were about reinstating services that had been lost or preserving what currently exists (particularly in instances where communities have been informed that they are about to lose the service in question).
SERVICE IMPROVEMENT PRIORITIES
4.2 Although there were local issues raised in terms of service improvement priorities, there was a broad consensus across all regions as to what the priority quality and access issues, and to which services they relate, are for residents in rural Scotland (see Annex 5). These are shown below and represent those services prioritised for improvement that by all, or almost all, of the groups. They are:
- access to public transport, including buses, trains and planes (routes, timetables, integration of different services) & rising cost of private transport (fuel, tax, lack of petrol stations etc)
- access to health centres, GPs and emergency health services (limited opening hours, seniority of staff, withdrawal of other services such as mid-wife and health visitors, dental services)
- access to other emergency services - (withdrawal of local 'bobby', longer travel times for fire service etc).
- access to refuse collection and recycling (frequency, high journey times) and poor quality ('poorly' implemented or badly communicated)
- access to post offices and retail shops (shops closing, limited choice, high travel times as result, loss of community centre)
- quality of road maintenance and perceived short-termist view on maintenance ('patching up', heavy lorries)
- access to and quality of communication services (poor reception and service quality of telephone, mobiles, broadband, television)
- access and quality of utilities, water and energy (poor quality of product, poor service from staff, belief that rural locations were unimportant)
- access to, and quality of, housing was also a concern in a sizeable minority of the communities consulted, and leisure, recreation and education were also widely discussed but less so than the other issues described above.
FACTORS IMPACTING ON PERCEPTION OF SERVICES
4.3 When discussing service priorities across the different regions, one of the major findings was that there were many factors that impacted on individuals' perceptions of service provision. These factors include:
Remoteness
4.4 Remoteness had an obvious effect on service accessibility. It directly increases travel time, both private and public and, increases private travel costs (need for a car and cost of fuel). However, remoteness had a positive benefit in that more remote communities had a greater sense of community. Expectations of access were far lower amongst the remote communities as all participants were well aware that often practicalities got in the way of delivery services on a par with urban areas. Often loss of community spirit was itself attributed to a general loss of community-based facilities or services e.g. prescriptions being delivered to the local shop.
Location of work
4.5 Some participants were living in rural areas yet were commuting to larger towns and cities. Those who were commuting had frequently replaced accessing services locally for accessing services where they work and this directly impacted on their perception of services. Many commuters did all their shopping, visited the GP and dentist all at their work location. Their children would often also go to school at the work location since it was more feasible than the local school. Feasibility was due to inflexible transport to and from the local school and the lack/high cost of local childcare pre and after school.
Distance lived from road
4.6 Interestingly the distance a resident lived from the main road also seemed to impact on their perception of service provision - both positively and negatively. On the positive side the group attendees were more likely to have private access to utilities such as water and sewage. However, if they lived a "long way off the beaten track", repairmen were highly unlikely to find them and seemed less keen to attend to issues promptly. Many who lived in properties a distance from the main road felt they were receiving a poorer level of service, specifically from the private sector utilities, due to the distance and effort involved in coming to see to the problem.
Tourist areas
4.7 Those participants living in a tourist area had a very different perception of services such as public toilets, state of the roads, road signs, stopping places for viewing and picnics, cost of ferries etc, with these participants assessing their quality in the light of attracting tourists and based on feedback they had received from visitors.
Age/life-stage
4.8 Those with young children were far more concerned with schooling (quality and access to education, access to transport to schools, access to school dentists), childcare (access to flexible after school childcare and early years), leisure activities and libraries than other sectors of the community. Those with young adults in their family were more concerned with access to public transport for leisure, adult education and training and future employment opportunities in the region. They were also most concerned with access to good quality, affordable housing and good quality retail shops. Those elderly and vulnerable and their carers were most concerned with access to care, support, training for carers, information on benefits etc. Interestingly, however, those who perceived that their needs were increasingly ignored were the middle aged, working residents. They perceived themselves as 'low priority' for especially public services such as health and transport.
Access to private transport
4.9 Many participants felt they were unable to live without a car and since purchase of private transport their access to some services had greatly increased e.g. retail shops, recycling centres etc. Therefore when assessing access to services such as recycling they were able to conclude that they had adequate access, but only because they had access to a private car. However, private car owners were acutely aware that many were less lucky such as the elderly, young adults, vulnerable and disabled. Many of the groups were strong to point out that access should be 'equal within reason' and were happy for the community's priority list to reflect that.
Level of income
4.10 Level of income was perceived to have a direct impact on perception of access to services. Higher income participants were deemed to have greater choice of private housing, higher access to private transport with which to access more services such as shopping centres, recycling centres etc. It was perceived that the lower the level of income, the lower the chance of access was and therefore the lower the quality
Length of time of residence in local area
4.11 Incomers to areas tended to rationalise poor access more easily than those who had grown up in the area. This was thought to reflect the fact that incomers had 'chosen' to move to the area and in doing so had based their decision on an overall improvement in quality of life. Those born in the area were perhaps harsher graders as often they had experienced withdrawal of service such as chiropody, district nurse or prescriptions delivered to the local post office. Many were able to recall 'how it used to be'.
Farmers
4.12 Those still working on the land were naturally most concerned with the state of farming and agriculture and what the future would hold for them in terms of profit and feasibility. Of particular concern was the cost of training youngsters mainly from those on the islands, due to the cost of transport off the island to attend college.
SERVICE PRIORITIES BY REGION & AREA PROFILES
4.13 A summary of regional findings is set out in this section.
« Previous | Contents | Next »