Seòmar agus comataidhean

It is well known that I concern myself with outcomes. Processes should help to achieve outcomes. They should not be hindering them or be overly cumbersome or difficult to navigate.

We are absolutely committed to advancing equality, and the PSED is an example of the important levers that we have available to us. We are leading by example to inspire other public bodies to put equality front and centre. However, we need to remember that it is ultimately for public bodies that are independent of Government to set out what they intend to achieve and how they will do that. I take a leadership role in that regard and, as you know, I take it very seriously, I have communicated that to a wide range of audiences and groups, both in person and in correspondence.

In engaging with the PSED, we also have to be mindful of the limits on legislative competence in such frameworks. Vuyi Stutley has gone over some of that detail and I will not repeat it, but we need to remember that, because it is a “due regard” duty, it is by its nature a procedural duty. That means that it is not outcomes focused in its form, but I am clear that the policy intention behind the PSED is substantive.

The Equality Act 2010, in which the duty sits, was intended to be transformative when it was introduced. It is a wide-ranging and on-going duty to engage in conscious consideration of the three needs, and we see that as a strength. If it required a narrower focus on identifying or achieving particular outcomes, we would see that as a limitation. It needs to be seen in the wider sense. I can go into further detail on that if you wish.

Nick Bland would like to add to what I have said.

I cannot speak on behalf of other public bodies. You would have to ask them.

Indeed.

Thank you very much, convener, and good morning to the committee. Thank you very much for the opportunity to discuss the report of your inquiry into the operation of the PSED in Scotland and my response. I also want to thank the stakeholders who gave evidence to the committee. Their insights add to the evidence about how the PSED works in practice, existing challenges and, of course, how those can be overcome. There is a lot for us to cover today and I welcome this discussion.

I am committed to a respectful, fair and diverse Scotland. The PSED and the Scotland-specific duties are important tools to achieve that goal. I am dedicated to demonstrating leadership to increase awareness of the PSED and the SSDs across the public sector. It is vital that public bodies understand and meet their obligations under the Equality Act 2010. I have championed equality and a culture of shared learning and accountability, including through engaging with ministerial colleagues and running round-table events for duty bearers and equality groups.

I seek to make the most effective use of all available powers. Notably, I used for the first time the power under regulation 11 of the Equality Act 2010 (Specific Duties) (Scotland) Regulations 2012 when I wrote to duty bearers on 16 December, requiring them to consider our new equality and human rights mainstreaming toolkit.

We must continue to make Scotland’s collective response to the PSED more effective, and on 8 December we published our proposals for PSED improvement activity until December 2029 in the regulation 12 report. That was an important step towards that goal, which demonstrates our continued commitment. The regulation 12 report sets out a range of concrete actions to enhance leadership, capability and capacity in the private sector, with a focus on sharing good practice, and it highlights fostering good relations, which was one of the key themes in the committee’s inquiry.

Alongside the regulation 12 report, we published an impressive suite of mainstreaming resources, which I am proud of. They should help further establish equality and human rights at the heart of private sector decision making and service design. The suite includes the equality and human rights mainstreaming strategy, presenting principles and drivers for change; the mainstreaming action plan, showcasing 61 actions to embed equality and human rights across Government; and the online mainstreaming toolkit, featuring a self-assessment tool and over 100 practical resources to help duty bearers evaluate and strengthen their mainstreaming efforts.

I welcome the committee report’s emphasis on fostering good relations.

We continue to experience a regression on equality, diversity and rights around the world where hate against already vulnerable groups is becoming increasingly normalised. This division and violence has no place in Scotland. Fostering good relations is crucial to a safe, respectful and inclusive Scotland and that is why the Scottish Government is taking action. We have recently invested an additional £300,000 to strengthen community cohesion, partnering with the STV children’s appeal to support grass-roots projects that bring together people across generations, cultures and faith.

Our “We are Scotland” media campaign celebrates diversity and shared values, reminding us that Scotland is stronger for the differences that shape us. In addition, we continue to directly support a wide range of community organisations through investing £7.9 million this year in crucial work relating to community cohesion to uphold rights across all protected characteristics, fight discrimination, advance equality and foster good relations, and that includes funding for interfaith dialogue and anti-racism work. We have established the Anti-Racism Observatory for Scotland, known as AROS, a national centre of excellence to tackle structural racism and promote inclusion, for which we will provide £3 million between now and December 2027.

11:30

Embedding equality and human rights across the private sector is essential. The mainstreaming suite, our programme of PSED improvement and our work to foster good relations demonstrate our continued commitment to meaningful action and to making the most effective use of the powers that we have. We will continue to do so to make Scotland a fairer, safer and more inclusive place for everyone. Thank you, convener.

The fund that you are referring to supports 47 organisations. It is important to emphasise that. We have previously engaged with LGBT Youth Scotland to determine the facts around various media reports. What you are referring to now and what you are presenting to me I have no way of fact checking in live time. It is an organisation that has been in the spotlight and it gets a lot of attention. I have visited the organisation, I have spoken to the users of that organisation, and I have seen first hand the good work that it is doing in supporting young people in various ways. As a constituency MSP, I have also had communications from parents who have been grateful for the work that the organisation has done in increasing awareness, supporting parents, and supporting youngsters. There is a wide variety of work that is going on there.

I have been assured that LGBT Youth Scotland has strengthened its safeguarding policies to ensure that they are in line with legislation and that they meet the national standards. It continues to review those policies annually to make sure that they are as comprehensive as possible.

My answer to that is that I am very much in line with the EHRC on this. We know that robust, good-quality data is important. We know that because we shape our services around that data. We can forward plan based on it and allocate funding. There are lots of good reasons for having that data so absolutely, we need to do that.

We also need to remember that, for the data that we collect, there have to be good reasons for doing so, because people have to offer that data. Nobody could force any one of us in this room to declare anything about ourselves that we do not wish to. When I have filled in the additional forms that go along with recruitment processes, for instance, I know that, on occasion, I possibly have not filled in the bit about which ethnic minority you belong to. We need to make sure that people are engaged in relation to giving their data and know and have confidence that their data will be used appropriately and proportionately for the purpose for which it is collected. That is what I am saying on that just now. I do not know if there is anything else that officials would like to add.

It is fair enough to ask the questions, Ms Gosal. I have respectfully listened to that question and I have given you an answer. Any discussions about the law with regard to any court cases are best conducted within that court setting. It is only right that they are discussed there and that is fair to both sides—to the litigants and to the presenters.

That is a good question to highlight. The Scotland-specific duties have a complex framework, and listed authorities in Scotland already have multiple mandated reporting cycles to balance. If reporting cycles change for the SSDs, that could impact the others. They are all interrelated, and that could cause duplication, increased administrative load or misalignment with other statutory processes.

Many factors have to be carefully considered if we are to streamline the reporting process. Reporting cycles often align with regulatory requirements, governance frameworks, funding timetables, for instance, or indeed cross-departmental collaboration. Any adjustments, therefore, would require careful consideration and clear communication to avoid confusion or misalignment. Of course, we have stakeholders who rely on reports for operational planning, and they might well resist changes if the new cycles make it harder for them to forecast and monitor performance.

11:45

Managing those expectations is essential to minimise disruption and maintain trust. As we continue to take a phased approach to PSED improvement, we will carefully consider how the reporting cycle could be improved, and that will include consideration of possible alignment with the reporting requirements related to the new human rights bill, for instance.

For completeness, one further complexity to note is that different public bodies have come on stream as duty bearers at different times, meaning that there is no single set of reporting dates. That is also a factor that we would consider in any reviews of cycles.

Since the Supreme Court’s ruling, we have been clear that we accept that judgment, and the Government is taking forward the detailed work that is necessary as a consequence of the judgment. I remind the committee that it is the statutory role of the Equality and Human Rights Commission to monitor and enforce compliance with the Equality Act 2010, given that it is the regulator of that act. I have been clear that we expect everyone to follow the law. There is no ambiguity about that whatsoever. I have said that repeatedly in my answers in the chamber and, indeed, in front of this committee.

The Supreme Court ruling provided clarification, but it did not say anything about the how, in that sense. As part of the work that we have been undertaking to scrutinise the judgment and ensure that everything aligns, a working group has been established. It was originally known as a short-life working group, but the work is taking more time, so it is now known as a working group. The group, which is convened by the permanent secretary, was established to consider the implications of the Supreme Court judgment in areas such as legislation, guidance and policy.

It might be helpful for me to give a summary update of the work that we have undertaken—I know that you would be very interested in that. The Government is often asked what we have done. Some people say that we have done nothing, but I do not believe that that is true at all. We have made progress in what is quite an extensive area. The EHRC acknowledges that we are talking about a huge estate. There are many areas to consider, and we are proceeding through the work systematically.

To date, the Scottish Government has updated its guidance on the Gender Representation on Public Boards (Scotland) Act 2018. We have amended the public appointments recruitment process for public bodies that are subject to that act, with data on biological sex at birth now being collated and used. We have introduced an interim trans and non-binary inclusion policy for Scottish Government staff, and we have removed a line regarding facilities use while we develop new policy and guidance in consultation with trade unions.

We have published revised guidance on supporting transgender pupils in schools, and we recognise that the EHRC is reviewing technical guidance for schools. We have advanced joint work with Police Scotland, with a public consultation on the stop and search code of practice to be issued shortly.

We have also actively engaged with health boards. On 30 September 2025, the director of the health workforce wrote to health boards to reinforce the importance of ensuring that the law is followed and that the Supreme Court judgment is implemented. However, the application of the law following the Supreme Court ruling remains a matter for boards, in accordance with their legal advice.

Furthermore, we conducted an initial review of facilities across the Scottish Government estate, and a more detailed review is now under way to ensure that our provision meets the needs of staff and the legal requirements. Our approach is focused on ensuring accuracy and clarity, so that we avoid unnecessary complexity or confusion at a time of heightened public debate.

12:15

You mentioned legal challenges, which can come from all directions. People have the right to test the law through legal challenges, and we all support everybody’s legal rights in that regard. However, it is important to remember that the Supreme Court stated that its ruling should not be seen as a victory for one group over another. We must also be cognisant that everyone, across all the protected characteristics, has rights. We are following the law—I have made that clear, and I emphasise again that I expect everybody to follow the law—but we must not exclude people from accessing their basic rights. We need to find a way forward in which everybody’s human rights are protected, because I am sure that nobody on this committee would want one group to be excluded, marginalised and so on for the sake of another group. I believe that we can find solutions to this.

The preparations for developing the third equality evidence strategy are under way and we expect a draft of the strategy to be ready for consultation by late November 2026, with a view to publishing the final strategy by March 2027. The third equality evidence strategy will be designed collaboratively with Government analysts, policy makers and external organisations, including public authorities and bodies that are interested in improving equality evidence.

The priorities for the third evidence strategy will be shaped through the evaluation of the second strategy, a stakeholder engagement process and an internal audit of Scottish Government data sets. Initial engagement suggests that some areas from the second strategy will remain a priority, such as encouraging opportunities to further intersectional analysis.

An evaluation of the Scottish Government’s current evidence strategy, from 2023 to 2025, is now under way and is due for publication in spring 2026. That evaluation will provide an assessment of improvements to the equality evidence base and identify areas for improvement to take forward as part of the next strategy.