The assembly's report Doing Politics Differently, published on 13 January 2021, set out a ten-point vision and 60 recommendations across eight topic areas; the government responded on 23 November 2021 and committed to further citizens' assemblies, including one for under-16s.[1][2]
Citizens' Assembly of Scotland (2019–2021)
A government-commissioned assembly of 104 randomly selected residents that met from October 2019 to December 2020 on what kind of country Scotland should be. Boycotted by unionist parties as a perceived independence vehicle, it produced 60 recommendations; the government answered in November 2021.
- Location
- Reference point: Edinburgh, where the first weekends were held; members came from across Scotland
- Operating since
- 2019
- Governance
- Deliberative / sortition
- Legal status
- Recognised
- Economy
- Not applicable
- Autonomy level
- Program within an existing state
- Uses AI in governance
- No
Background
The Citizens' Assembly of Scotland was announced by First Minister Nicola Sturgeon on 24 April 2019, in a statement about Brexit and Scotland's constitutional future. It was presented as one of three strands of the government's approach, alongside legislation on referendum rules and cross-party talks. That framing shaped everything that followed: for supporters of the union, an assembly announced in the same breath as preparations for a possible second independence referendum looked like a partisan device; for the government and organisers, it was an attempt to copy Ireland's assemblies and "do politics differently".
How it is governed
- Mandate. The remit was deliberately broad: what kind of country Scotland should be seeking to build; how best to overcome the challenges Scotland and the world face in the 21st century, including those arising from Brexit; and what further work should be carried out to give people the detail they need to make informed choices about the future of the country.
- Independence from government. Two conveners — David Martin, a former Labour member of the European Parliament, and Kate Wimpress, a third-sector arts leader — took office in August 2019. A secretariat was hosted by government but the conveners stressed that the assembly would not decide whether Scotland should hold another referendum.
- Selection. Members were recruited by random selection to be broadly representative of Scotland's adult population by age, gender, socio-economic class, ethnicity, geography and political attitudes, including views on independence and Brexit. Elected politicians, party staff and advocacy group representatives were ineligible. The research team reports 104 members; members received a payment for each weekend.
- Process. The first weekend took place on 26–27 October 2019 in Edinburgh. Members met in person four times before COVID-19 restrictions; the second half of the process moved online, including four shorter sessions over four weekends in September 2020, and deliberation ended in December 2020. Members heard from experts and advocates, worked in small facilitated groups and voted on a vision and recommendations.
Economy and public goods
The Scottish Government funded the assembly. Its response to the report states a final cost of £0.938 million over two financial years against an original budget of £1.37 million; most of the underspend came from cancelled in-person meetings and staff working from home during the pandemic. An earlier freedom-of-information release had given a provisional figure of about £764,000.
Conflict and disputes
- Boycott. In mid-2019 the Scottish Conservatives and Scottish Liberal Democrats refused to take part, and the campaign group Scotland in Union urged supporters to stay away. The Conservative constitution spokesman called the plan a "nationalist stunt"; the Liberal Democrat leader said taxpayers' money should not fund a party-political process. Remarks by SNP MP Joanna Cherry describing the assembly as a way to move Scotland on from Brexit fuelled suspicion; co-convener David Martin called the boycott "foolish" and said it would make no difference to the assembly's work.
- Breadth of remit. The official research report found that the breadth of the questions made it hard to provide the necessary expertise on every topic and produced wide-ranging recommendations that may be difficult to turn into policy.
Outcomes
The final report, Doing Politics Differently, was published on 13 January 2021. It contained a ten-point vision and 60 recommendations grouped in eight themes, from how decisions are taken — including more use of citizens' assemblies and a permanent "house of citizens" to scrutinise legislation — to tax, incomes, climate and young people. The Scottish Parliament noted the report shortly before the May 2021 election and commended it to its successor.
The government responded on 23 November 2021, mapping existing policies onto the recommendations. It committed to further citizens' assemblies, which it said were "here to stay", including one for under-16s, and to deliberative engagement on local government funding developed with the Scottish Green Party. On recommendations requiring powers reserved to Westminster, it pointed to a £10 million pilot fund for a four-day week and a proposed Migration Service for Scotland, while saying there was little realistic prospect of further tax devolution. Critics note that much of the response restated policies already announced.
The research report found that members found the experience rewarding and felt included and empowered; that politicians and journalists saw the assembly as an important prototype; and that moving online did not reduce the quality of collaboration. It recommended broader public engagement and a clearer mandate for future assemblies. Scotland went on to run a separate Climate Assembly from late 2020.
Lessons for institution design
- Who convenes, and when, affects legitimacy. Launching an assembly in a speech about independence made it easy to dismiss as partisan, and a boycott by major parties narrowed its political audience.
- Broad "vision" remits trade influence for inclusiveness. Open questions let members set priorities, but produce recommendations too diffuse for any one ministry to own.
- Response duties work better when specific. A response that maps existing policy onto recommendations is not the same as accepting or rejecting each one with reasons.
- Budgets can be met. The assembly came in well under budget, partly by necessity; online sessions proved viable.
Further reading
Timeline
- Apr 2019First Minister Nicola Sturgeon announces a citizens' assembly on Scotland's future (24 April). [S1]Established
- Oct 2019The assembly holds its first weekend in Edinburgh (26–27 October). [S1]Established
- 2019The Scottish Conservatives, Scottish Liberal Democrats and Scotland in Union call for a boycott; co-conveners David Martin and Kate Wimpress take office in August. [S3]Established
- Sept 2020After four in-person meetings, COVID-19 moves the assembly online; it reconvenes in September and concludes in December. [S6]Established
- Jan 2021Doing Politics Differently is published (13 January): a ten-point vision and 60 recommendations. [S1]Established
- Nov 2021The government publishes its response and a minister makes a statement to Parliament (23 November), committing to future assemblies. [S2]Established
- Jan 2022The research report by academics and government social researchers is published (25 January). [S5]Established
Mechanisms in use
Outcomes & controversies
Report Doing Politics Differently (13 January 2021): a ten-point vision and 60 recommendations in eight themes. The government's November 2021 response committed to further assemblies, including one for under-16s; final cost £0.938 million against a £1.37 million budget.
Post-mortem
A one-off advisory assembly. Its broad remit and the unionist parties' boycott limited its political traction; the government response largely mapped existing policy onto the recommendations, but it helped normalise assemblies in Scottish government practice.
Claims
The Scottish Conservatives, Scottish Liberal Democrats and the campaign group Scotland in Union called for a boycott of the assembly, which critics linked to the government's independence plans.[1][2]
The official research report found that members felt included and empowered and that moving online did not reduce collaboration, but that the breadth of the remit made it hard to supply expertise and produced recommendations that may be difficult to turn into policy.[1][2]