Seòmar agus comataidhean

I will add a couple of short points. I remind everyone that health boards, like other public service providers, have to undertake equality impact assessments on any decisions that they make. That puts it on the record that they have looked at the equality impact and are taking mitigating factors into account. If there is a disproportionate impact on certain groups, the mitigating actions that they are going to take are on record.

I can confirm that the responsibility for the EHRBAG secretariat function has officially been transferred to the Scottish exchequer. I know that doing that was a request for some time, so I hope that it gives clear evidence of that alignment—so that, as members have said, we can “follow the money”. That portfolio has been shifted into the Scottish exchequer, which demonstrates the direct link between them.

I can come in briefly on that. The way that it works is that we give money to strategic delivery partners who undertake that work, because they are best placed to do it. They have the knowledge and expertise and, usually, they have the voice of lived experience. I could give the example of the Scottish Refugee Council.

On the funding and procurement process, when the grant offer letters go out, the contract is very clear about what services we expect to be delivered. We have internal and external organisations that monitor that, analyse it and make sure that all the processes are followed. For example—I always get this one mixed up—Inspiring Scotland has more than 17 years of experience and it does regular checks and balances to make sure that the money that we provide is used for the intended purpose. If it is not, there are ways of managing that, as there are with many contracts.

I have been over how and why we procure services. In previous sessions, the issue of conflation has been raised—maybe it was Tess White who raised it. Different organisations provide different services. Some of them are campaigners and provide services, too. I have made it very clear in the past that the organisations that we fund are funded for specific services that they provide. Some of them may undertake campaigning work while others may not. None of that campaigning work is funded by the Scottish Government in any way whatsoever. Generally speaking, the organisations provide services such as providing information, gathering data, listening to the voices of lived experience, running suicide helplines and informing future policy. They are undertaking very valuable work.

I will have a go. If anything is left unanswered, I am also happy to follow up with you on it.

Cat McMeeken was correct, and I have reinforced what she said. One of the services that is provided is advocacy work. Often, the most marginalised people are not in a place to be able to represent themselves, so they need somebody advocating for them. For instance, the Scottish Refugee Council has just been awarded a contract to assist migrants—they are some of the most vulnerable people, as they are not able to access their rights on issues such as housing, benefits or healthcare. It is important to remember that the principle applies across all protected characteristics. Being trans is a protected characteristic, so trans people would and should be entitled to the same services as anyone with any other protected characteristic.

We will continue to work with our partners in Inspiring Scotland, with whom we have a well-established relationship. In response to Tess White’s question, on the budget that comes out of my portfolio and the equality and human rights fund, it might be helpful for you to be aware that 31 per cent of my total budget is spent on disability organisations and supporting people with disabilities. Twenty-two per cent of the budget is spent on advancing race equality and in the wider field. Twenty per cent of the budget is spent on women and girls. Fourteen per cent, which is the least amount, is spent on supporting organisations that work in the LGBTQI arena. I hope that that gives you an indication of the proportions of the money that is spent.

It is always strange when your words are quoted back to you, and I stand by them. I gave an outline in my opening statement of the work that I have been doing. That kind of infrastructural work of doing cultural change, enabling conversations and increasing knowledge, competence and capability, does not grab the headlines, but it makes the foundations for future decisions more robust and connected, as you say. That all feeds into some of the remarks that you said came out of the first evidence session this morning.

In that sense, none of that surprises me. Thanks for the opportunity to reinforce what the role of an equalities minister is. I take very seriously the right demand for mainstreaming. With my support and challenge to colleagues, I can say that, yes, they are speaking to one another, and they always have done.

I think that what sometimes gets lost, with the best will in the world, because we referred to it earlier, is that everybody has their different portfolios and people are very keen on getting on with their job. Having somebody who can take a wider view and see all the connections and then offer that view has been very well received by my colleagues. One massive demonstration of that is the fact that the cabinet secretary and I are both here during a pre-budget scrutiny evidence session. That is another indication that we are coming out of our silos.

I always say that everybody wants everybody else to come out of their silos until I turn around and say, “You come out of yours.” That is always a bit more challenging.

There is also the annual ministerial budget workshop, which is a great opportunity when everybody is in the room at the same time. It means that clear connections can be made between portfolio decisions in the room in real time, and I am able to add my voice to that as well. The focus on protected characteristics, socioeconomic disadvantage and children’s rights, for instance, embeds equality and human rights into decisions that ministers make.

The new equality outcomes were published in April this year. We have taken a new approach to the equality outcome-setting process, so that it provides the consistency that Pam Gosal asks for and leadership across Government.

The three key outcomes that act as enablers of that system-wide change, which is what we all want, focus on improving the use and awareness of equality evidence, improving how we are informed by lived experience and participation and strengthening the relevant impact assessments. Each outcome is underpinned by short-term and long-term actions over a four-year period.

I hope that that gives you a clear indication of our commitment to drive meaningful, long-term change by addressing the structural barriers that impact equality across all of the Scottish Government, as we are very much aware. I hope that that is enough information.

I am very grateful to the Alnisa service for working with us. The Government is benefiting from the experience, knowledge and expertise that that service has to offer. I reassure the committee that we are listening very carefully to its opinions and that we will continue to work with it.

Thank you for that question. You will be aware that the act was passed in 2020, so if it is all right to do so, I will bring in Nel on that point.

That is a really good point. As I said in my opening remarks, officials are undertaking a mapping exercise to identify the existing training in sectors such as education, health and policing, which will enable us to identify gaps and opportunities. Once that exercise has been completed, officials will engage with stakeholders to co-design appropriate training solutions. It is essential that they are co-designed and that we hear from people who have experience of the matter, whether they be victims or those who support or provide services, so that we have a joined-up approach. That is one of the reasons why it has taken a bit of time to do the work, but we are determined to do it well and to ensure that our approach is sustainable.

The training materials and the awareness-raising materials will be developed for the professional sector and for the wider public, because there is a need for education and awareness raising across society. As I said, the materials will be culturally appropriate and available in multiple languages. We will ensure that inclusive formats are used so that the materials are accessible to everybody.

In order to further raise awareness, officials are exploring the option of organising an event to mark the international day of zero tolerance for FGM in February 2026. That is an example of work not only with sectors and communities but with civic society at large.

I alluded to materials being developed with our advisory group for ethnic minority women and girls. We are drawing on that group’s expertise to ensure that the content is appropriate, accurate and targeted.

I can give you reassurance that that work is well under way. The development of the materials will begin in late summer or autumn. I am establishing a timeline for you over the next year, because we are absolutely on track for implementation in 2026.

Absolutely. Experience from England and Wales shows us that increased awareness and training among professionals led to a rise in the number of applications for FGM protection orders. That clearly demonstrates the effectiveness of awareness raising and training being part of implementation.