When SRC held its national conference in Perth last June, one of the workshops asked a question that people across Scotland’s recovery communities had been raising for a long time.
What does it actually feel like to participate? And does it make any difference?
The answers were honest. People spoke about the times they had shown up — to consultations, forums, working groups, engagement sessions — and left wondering whether anything would come of it. They talked about the exhaustion of repeating their experiences without seeing change. They named what gets in the way: stigma, inaccessible language, not being told what happened after they contributed, processes that felt designed for the system rather than for them.
But people also spoke about what works. About the difference that skilled, compassionate facilitation makes. About what it feels like when a space is genuinely safe. About the power of peer connection — being in a room with people who understand, where you don’t have to explain everything from scratch. About the moments when participation actually led somewhere, and how that changed everything.
That conversation helped shape what followed.
What SRC did
Over the months that followed the conference, SRC undertook a thorough review of how it currently engages with people with lived and living experience — and how that needs to change.
We looked at our existing structures: NRAN, the LERO Leadership Group, membership pathways, and local and national forums. We were honest about what we found. Some of these structures work well for the people who are engaged with them. But too many lack the clarity, consistency, and feedback that people need to feel their involvement is worthwhile. Participation has sometimes relied on individual relationships rather than proper systems. Two-way communication — telling people what happened as a result of their input — has not always been as strong as it should be.
We held sessions with NRAN and LERO members, with recovery communities across Scotland, and with the Scottish Government’s Drug and Alcohol Policy Team. We asked three questions in every session: what makes participation meaningful for you? How can SRC make sure your voice influences national decisions? What would help you or your group to get involved?
The answers were consistent, and they are the foundation of everything in this review.
What you told us
Meaningful participation starts long before a consultation is launched. It begins with relationship-building — taking time to build trust in communities before arriving with questions. It requires early involvement, where people are shaping the direction of work rather than reacting to decisions already made.
People want to know what happens next. Not just a thank you for coming, but a clear answer to the question: what changed because I was there? The “you said / we did / we can’t because” approach — being transparent about what was acted on, and honest when something couldn’t be — was identified as essential to building trust and keeping people engaged.
Participation needs to be trauma-informed. That means thinking about emotional preparation, having skilled facilitators who understand what they’re doing, and building in aftercare for people after difficult conversations. It means never re-traumatising people in the name of engagement.
Practical barriers are real and they matter. Transport costs, digital access, childcare, the timing of sessions, whether expenses are paid — these are not minor inconveniences. For many people, they are the difference between being able to take part and not. Smaller and rural groups face these barriers most acutely, and the review is clear that they need additional, targeted support.
And above all, people want participation that leads somewhere. Not tick-box consultation. Not tokenism. Real influence — the kind where lived and living experience shapes policy, services, and systems in ways that are visible and lasting.
What SRC is committing to
The review sets out fifteen recommendations for how SRC strengthens its approach to participation and engagement. These cover everything from how meeting agendas are co-produced with participants, to making membership the clear gateway for getting involved in SRC’s work, to embedding proper governance so that every engagement process has to demonstrate how feedback was used.
Some of the most important commitments are also the simplest. Always tell people what happened with their input. Never treat lived experience as a box to tick. Invest in peer mentoring and confidence-building so that people can contribute on their own terms, at their own pace. Resource participation properly — including covering the practical costs that make attendance possible.
We are also committing to strengthen our role as a bridge. SRC’s job is to connect recovery communities to national conversations — to make sure that what people tell us reaches the Scottish Government, ADPs, and policy spaces, and that what happens in those spaces is brought back clearly and honestly to communities.
Why this matters
Scotland’s recovery system is shaped by decisions made at every level — in government, in local planning, in service design, in how funding is allocated. For those decisions to reflect the realities of people’s lives, the people who know those realities best need to be in the room — not as guests, but as partners.
That is not just good practice. It is a rights issue. The Charter of Rights is clear: people affected by drug and alcohol harm have the right to participate in decisions that affect them, to be treated with dignity and respect, and to have their voices genuinely shape the systems that are meant to support them.
This review is SRC’s commitment to taking that seriously.
What this means for you
If you have lived or living experience of drug or alcohol harm — whether your own, a family member’s, or someone you support — your voice belongs in these conversations. Not as a case study. Not as a representative of a category. As a person with knowledge, expertise, and a genuine stake in how Scotland’s recovery systems work.
SRC wants to make it easier to get involved, easier to stay involved, and easier to see the difference that involvement makes.
The review is available to read in full on our website. If you want to find out more about how you can get involved in SRC’s work — through NRAN, through membership, through local engagement, or through future national conversations — we want to hear from you.
Because being heard is not the same as being listened to. And being listened to is not the same as influencing change. That is what this review is working towards — and we know we cannot get there without you.
