Seòmar agus comataidhean

Item 2 is evidence from the Scottish Government on the Gender Representation on Public Boards (Amendment) (Scotland) Bill. We have with us Shirley-Anne Somerville, Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice, who is accompanied by supporting officials Eileen Flanagan, head of the women’s equality unit; Lucy Galloway, a solicitor in the Scottish Government’s legal directorate; and Annie Milovic, senior policy adviser in the gender equality policy team. Thank you for joining us this morning.

I refer members to papers 1 and 2, and I invite the cabinet secretary to make a brief opening statement.

A survey that was conducted by the centre for international labour market studies found that women make up only 4 per cent of the total oil and gas workforce in the United Kingdom. Here in Scotland, we have an opportunity to deliver equality for women and girls through our plans for a just transition. What is the Scottish Government doing to ensure that women and girls reap their fair share of the opportunities and benefits that a just transition will bring to Scotland?

To ask the Scottish Government how it is embedding gender equality into its efforts to deliver a just transition. (S6O-03073)

I welcome the opportunity to speak to my amendments 79 and 82.

At stage 1, we received evidence from the RSPB that offences committed under the Animal Health and Welfare (Scotland) Act 2006 should be included as relevant offences with regard to the wildlife traps and grouse licensing schemes that are set up. The RSPB set out its rationale for that, and the committee encouraged the Scottish Government to look at that ahead of stage 2. I am grateful to the minister for offering her support for the amendments.

Amendments 79 and 82 seek to achieve exactly that. The provisions are already complex, but my amendments simply seek to add to the list of legislation so that an offence that is committed under section 19 of the 2006 act is added to the list of offences to be considered in respect of revoking or suspending a licence. Section 19 of the 2006 act sets out that a person will have committed an offence if they are found to have caused a “protected animal unnecessary suffering” by an act that they knew would have caused, or would have been likely to cause, that animal to suffer. Amendment 79 would add to the bill an offence under section 19 of the 2006 act as a ground for revoking or suspending a wildlife trap licence, and amendment 82 would do the same for a grouse licence.

My amendments would make important additions to the bill to provide greater protection for animals and wildlife, and I hope that members will support them.

I extend my thanks to Rona Mackay for bringing this incredibly important debate to the chamber, and I welcome people in the gallery.

I have raised my experience as the child of a deaf adult on several occasions in the chamber, and I have given my dad many mentions. However, my experience as a CODA—child of deaf adult—has deeply influenced my understanding of how we should approach disabilities, in particular ones that relate to hearing loss and communication.

The first meeting that I had with a deafblind person was more than 40 years ago. I was just a wee girl visiting Aberdeen deaf club with my dad. An elderly woman was sitting at a table, with a few people surrounding her. A person was crouching down beside her, holding the woman’s hand upwards in the palm of her hand. They were using the palm as though it were a drawing board or keyboard.

My dad placed his hand on my back to coax me forward to say, “Hello.” I looked back and signed to him, “What is she doing?” He signed to me, “She is deaf and blind, and that is how she communicates.”

I went over and waved “Hello” to the person doing the interpreting. They then signed to the deafblind woman that a young girl—Len’s daughter—was saying hello to her. She gave me a huge smile and tapped my hand.

What I did not understand then but have a profound understanding of now is the social isolation and loneliness that can accompany living with deafblindness, and how my dad’s small push on my back was a small but significant teaching to ensure that I was polite and introduced myself. It also encouraged me to have a go at communicating, regardless of my hesitations at my abilities, because everyone needs connection.

As an adult, I realise that that interaction gave me the opportunity to learn that deafblindness—even within our community of deaf people and CODAs—was a unique experience with distinct communication and interaction support needs.

Dual sensory impairment or loss, or the loss of sight and hearing to the point at which someone’s communication and ability to access information are impacted, is a distinct disability. Deafblind UK explains:

“If you mix the colours yellow and blue together, you get green. Green is completely different to both yellow and blue, it is a colour in its own right.

The same is true of deafblindness. If you have sight loss and hearing loss, then you are deafblind, which is a completely unique condition.”

It bears repeating that, across Scotland, about 30,000 people are living with deafblindness. I just did a wee search—that number is almost equivalent to the population of Dumfries. That is a significant amount of people.

Those people are a wide variety of ages, but deafblindness is more common in older people, such as the lady I met when I was little. As was mentioned, as a result of our ageing population, the number of people living with deafblindness is due to rise.

Some of those living with deafblindness will struggle to see and hear the television, while others might not be able to see or hear anything at all. There is a wide spectrum of dual sensory impairment or loss, which affects everyone differently.

Currently, as we have heard, Scotland lacks a legal definition for deafblindness. I believe that our agreeing on a definition would be a crucial step towards recognising and diagnosing dual sensory loss at the earliest point and addressing the unique challenges that the deafblind community faces.

The World Health Organization, alongside other significant health systems and countries, has adopted the Nordic definition of deafblindness, and the European Parliament recognised deafblindness as a unique disability 20 years ago. It is time that Scotland did the same, and I am grateful for Deafblind Scotland’s work in raising the issue and for the support of colleagues and other stakeholders on the cross-party group on deafness, of which I am a member.

I am grateful for the opportunity to speak in this debate, and it is particularly poignant to note that our speeches today could be being uniquely translated, as we deliver them, to those who relate to the deafblind experience. I hope that we have done them justice.

I will open up the conversation and ask whether the witnesses feel that there is any detail missing from the bill in regard to CPD or whether there should be a focus on any particular groups, such as tenants and young farmers.

The committee and I, as a constituency MSP, have seen some fantastic examples of diversification on farms, particularly in areas such as agri-tourism. That is often driven by the female force on the farms. They help to support rural communities to thrive. We have seen fantastic examples of employment opportunities for local young people in those environments. Do you think that that should be considered in this process? It is very much tied to the agricultural side of things.

Good morning. I have a question about citizen participation as part of our human rights budgeting approach. Where do you feel that such participation is best placed? Is that best done in committees or should the Scottish Government play a more direct role when it comes to citizen participation?

I will go to Clare Gallagher first, please.

It is great to get that feedback on the committee’s deliberative approach. As a member, I found it very beneficial to be in touch with citizens in that way. It was part of an educational process.

With regard to how we proceeded with our work, do you feel that other committees would benefit from our deliberative approach towards participatory budgeting? You mentioned cross-portfolio and collegiate working. Would it be beneficial for other committees to do that, too?