« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
Conclusions
36. Six years on from the first elections to the Scottish Parliament, the Scottish Executive appears to have had mixed success in engaging the attention of the Scottish public. In 2005, 58% had heard at least something about Scottish Executive activities over the last 12 months. However, the proportion with low levels of awareness (having heard 'not very much' or 'nothing at all') continues to outweigh those with high levels of awareness ('a great deal' or 'quite a lot'). At the same time, the Scottish public continues to indicate slightly higher levels of awareness of the activities of the UK government than the Scottish Executive.
37. Although higher levels of awareness of the activities of government cannot always be taken as straightforwardly 'positive' (for example, where awareness stems from negative media coverage), arguably a reasonable level of awareness of its activities is required if the Scottish Executive is to be successful in engaging the public with its work. Our analysis shows that women, those working in the private sector and those with low levels of interest in politics in general have particularly low levels of awareness. The Scottish Executive may wish consider whether there is a need to target these groups to raise their awareness of its activities.
38. Findings on levels of knowledge about devolution suggest that, in general, people appear to have a greater understanding of the responsibilities and remit of the Scottish institutions than of the mechanics of those institutions. In particular, just 32% are aware that the Scottish Executive is not just another name for the Scottish Parliament, suggesting that disentangling evaluations of the two is likely to be problematic. Again, if the Scottish Executive considers there is a need to improve levels of knowledge about devolution (particularly in relation to the mechanics of devolved government) to foster engagement, it may wish to consider targeting those groups who are relatively less knowledgeable at the moment.
39. Perceptions of power and influence in devolved Scotland appear still to be evolving. The proportion of the Scottish public who think the Scottish Executive has most say over how Scotland is run (23%) continues to be outweighed both by the proportion who think the UK government has most say (47%) and by the proportion who think the Scottish Executive ought to have most say (67%). However, since 2000 there has been a slow but significant increase in viewing the Scottish Parliament or Executive as the body with most influence. Meanwhile, in 2004 there was a substantial decrease in the proportion who thought the UK government was most influential.
40. These shifts in attitude are apparent across social groups, although there is some evidence to suggest that Liberal Democrats and broadsheet newspaper readers are particularly likely to have shifted their opinion since the early days of devolution on where influence lies. If these trends continue in future years, the gap between the aspirations of the Scottish public about who should have most say and their assessment of the influence of the devolved institutions in practice should narrow.
41. Only a very small minority of people in Scotland think that having a Scottish Parliament has weakened Scotland's voice in the UK. However, the aspiration of advocates of devolution that it would give Scotland a stronger voice in the UK does not appear to have been conclusively met either. In 2005, 41% thought having a Scottish Parliament was giving Scotland a stronger voice, while 50% thought it was making no difference. Findings on what drives positive assessments of the impact of devolution on Scotland's voice in the UK suggest that any future change is likely to be bound up with changing assessments of devolution in practice (trust, awareness and perceptions of the influence of the devolved institutions), and variations in levels of support for the principle of devolution and party political affiliation.
« Previous | Contents | Next »