Seòmar agus comataidhean

Are you referring to intersectionality regarding mainstreaming?

The use of the human rights budgeting principles remains part of the budget process. In our attempt to streamline the document and make it more accessible, we had to focus our efforts on those parts of the publication that we thought would add most value for the readers. We have set out our approach to human rights budgeting in detail over the past two years. Since there has been little change in the principles behind the Government’s approach to human rights budgeting, we focused on analysis of the key budget decisions in this year’s document.

The six key questions that were developed with EHRBAG were used as part of the case study approach, which included two questions that specifically asked how human rights impacts had been considered. Additionally, the portfolio summary chapters tied portfolio budget activity to both human rights articles and national outcomes.

There is an increased use of intersectional evidence and analysis to inform policy making across the Scottish Government, and that is helping us to understand structural inequalities and to inform inclusive policy making. Analysts and policy professionals—I will bring in Nick Bland shortly—are building their understanding of how to apply intersectional approaches. Practical considerations are set out in “Minority ethnic women’s experiences in Scotland 2024: intersectional evidence review”. That was published in December, and the committee will be aware of it.

When undertaking intersectional research, analysts are encouraged to use qualitative and quantitative sources of data and evidence to ensure a deeper understanding of intersectional issues. We then need to triangulate those to ensure that we get the best evidence possible and the clearest picture. Nick, can I bring you in here?

There was a lot in that question. I will do my best to cover everything, but please prompt me to come back in on anything that I miss.

Regarding the gender budgeting pilot and the overarching goals, I welcome the recommendations from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development on improving gender budgeting. The Scottish Government recognises the recommendation that we should develop those goals. We are actively considering Scottish gender goals and, in particular, how that recommendation intersects with recommendations from the First Minister’s national advisory group on women and girls. With that group, we are working to identify options to develop gender goals with women and girls with diverse lived experience, including BAME women.

We are also exploring how to progress the OECD’s second recommendation, on the changes that are required to the budget process, while being mindful that adaptations will be necessary to suit Scotland’s specific circumstances. The OECD recognises that no country in the world has managed to achieve what is recommended, so we are all on that journey. A lot of work is required and it is a long-term commitment that has to be specific to, in this case, Scotland.

On your point about cross-portfolio working and the intersectionality that will lead to good practice when it comes to completing good-quality equality impact assessments, that has been part of my discussions with the nine ministers I have met so far. By speaking to all my colleagues, I am able to spot the overarching connectedness across their portfolios. An example of that is in housing. I have a meeting with the housing minister coming up, but I can already spot and will bring to his attention the disproportionate impact that housing policy and budget decisions can have on ethnic minorities. I use that particular protected characteristic group as an example because you mentioned it.

Housing is one portfolio but, to give another example, I can also spot within the local government portfolio the need for access to services in communities. That also links to transport. We know that members of that protected characteristic group are more likely to use public transport and are less likely to have access to private transport. In my conversations with the Cabinet Secretary for Transport, I am able to link those policy areas together.

My role is not to make ministers’ decisions for them but to highlight those intersectionalities, to get them talking to one other and, more important, to get them to do that prior to making any decisions. That is the change of approach. I assure the committee that I am robustly challenging my colleagues to consider those things, to come out of our silos and to move towards that outcome rather than outcomes that are based on portfolios. I am aware that the effect of that approach will take a long time to be seen, because we are talking about people behaving differently and a cultural change is required for that. Ministers have been very receptive and very grateful for the oversight that I am able to provide.

It is early days and I am realistic that the impact that the work will have had on this year’s budget will have been minimal due to my coming into the role when I did. However, I am expecting a difference and I will be holding ministers to account, just as they hold me to account, you hold us to account and, more important, the general public hold us all to account. At the end of the day, that is what we want.

I want to see that work cut through, so that the family that Ms Gosal mentioned feels that tangible difference and can see that connection between their lives and the decisions that ministers make.

Absolutely. I have been watching the evidence and I am always open to it. I will bring in Matt Elsby on the equality and fairer Scotland budget statement.

A growing wealth of information is published alongside the Scottish budget—for instance, the Scottish Government published 23 supporting documents to give further information on the 2024-25 Scottish budget. I recognise that more needs to be done, including reviewing the information that is published alongside the Scottish budget.

We are considering carefully how we can improve public participation in the Scottish budget in the longer term, while bearing it in mind that I meet stakeholders regularly. I am actively exploring the suggestion that the previous chair of EHRBAG, Professor Angela O’Hagan, made, and the alternative proposal of moving to a two-stage process, with one publication in the summer and a further publication alongside the budget. That would require a fundamental overhaul of the current system and would therefore require careful assessment of how effective and feasible it would be. That is the longer-term picture.

Since I came into the process, and having come into my role when I did, I have been trying to change cultures, attitudes and ways of working. We will need to take time to measure the impact of that. Work and actions have started now. I expect there to be more positive evidence for next year’s round of budgeting and, in the following year of the three-year cycle, I think that we will see the biggest impact of the change in how we do things.

Thank you for that mention of visible leadership that I am taking. You referred to the NPF. The review does not fall within my remit, but I look forward to the outcome of the inquiry and to working with colleagues and stakeholders in implementing the next iteration of the NPF, from 2025. I would be happy to follow up with the committee in writing on specific points relating to my role in the framework as Minister for Equalities.

I note that similar questions have been raised in the chamber. With regard to our funding decisions, we continue to fund LGBTQI organisations that provide a service to a community that faces increased threats in the current climate. The quality assurance and monitoring process is done by either “Inspire” or “Aspire”—forgive me, but I always get confused; I think that it is “Inspire”. That organisation scrutinises the governance and ensures that the money that the Scottish Government allocates is used for its intended purposes. There is clear guidance. I have answered questions on the matter in the chamber, but, if Tess White wishes further information, I can certainly provide it.

Policy areas are expected to conduct an equality impact assessment during the policy cycle to inform their decisions. That is a clear expectation. Those assessments should draw on available evidence, as you say, to show the impact on groups with protected characteristics and the effectiveness of any mitigation measures.

It is important that we track that bit, too. We expect portfolios to develop evidence so that they can take account of the impact of the budget on groups with protected characteristics and make that connection with the scale of the impact of the proposed spend. As you say, there is a range of quantitative and qualitative evidence. That is where participation and lived experience come into it. That is especially important with marginalised groups such as the BAME community.

That can be translated into policy in a variety of ways. For example, officials are happy to receive briefings from external organisations. I meet with Engender, the Coalition for Racial Equality and Rights and many others—I will not list them all because I always miss folk out. Organisations and individuals may participate in formal consultation exercises, and published work may feature evidence reviews and support policy development. For example, the equality analysis team is currently finalising an evidence review on the experiences of non-binary people in Scotland. That action was set out in the non-binary action plan, which is to be published shortly. Similar exercises are undertaken across the protected characteristics, including the BAME community. I hope that that gives you some reassurance.

I will split that one between myself and Nick Bland as well. I will give you my view on it and what I am trying to achieve, and Nick will do the technical side of the data. We will do a double-hander.

As I alluded to in my opening remarks, the value that I can add is through working very closely with the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government, and through making sure that I have access to the cabinet secretaries who are making those decisions. I have arranged one-to-one bilaterals with each of the cabinet secretaries. I am starting with the Cabinet Secretary for Transport this week, in fact, so that work is now well under way.

In terms of improvements, the difference between now and what happened before is that, last year, the equalities minister simply attended those meetings. This year, my role has been enhanced; I have been given a specific role at the table and I am taking an active part. I will have one-to-one bilaterals with each cabinet secretary who makes those decisions, based on connecting the data. As the cabinet secretary put it, my role is to step back and see the wood for the trees—to make those connections and put them front and centre.

For instance, when I have my one-to-one with the Cabinet Secretary for Transport, there is no doubt that I will be able to draw on the equality impacts of budget decisions in relation to transport. They may have a knock-on effect on town planning, for instance, or schools or the availability of healthcare. In my role, I can provide those connections and therefore urge the cabinet secretaries to consider those outcomes when they are making a decision in their portfolio.

One element of my role is about seeing the knock-on effects, but I can also convene and pass information between the cabinet secretaries. With the best will in the world, Government is a big machine; everyone is in their bit trying to do the best job that they can, and they do not always have that.

That leads me to the cultural change that is required of all of us to see things not only from our own point of view, but to make those connections. I am leading on that, and I am pursuing it vigorously. I am reporting back to the cabinet secretary on how the bilaterals go, and I will make recommendations on that.

Another key bit that I am providing is support to the officials who support the cabinet secretaries. We are working within Government so that our papers and evidence gathering all align and are bringing everything together to give a clearer picture.

Nick Bland can speak about the specific data.