Seòmar agus comataidhean

Good afternoon, senator. Thank you very much for being with us today, and for your evidence and your answers so far.

I am interested in exploring unintended consequences and lessons learned, along similar lines to some of the questions from Pam Duncan-Glancy and Rachael Hamilton.

One area that we have heard evidence on, and heard people’s concerns around, is misaligned public services, particularly in health. Rachael Hamilton was talking about prisons, but there are questions around health. In the Irish experience, as far as you are aware, have there been any instances of trans women or trans men not being able to access healthcare provision, for example because of gender marker conflicts on health records?

Absolutely. One of my final points was going to be about data trusts and the ownership of data. Those are interesting questions that I do not know whether anyone has got to grips with, although I know that interesting thinking is going on around that. However, that is probably not a topic for today.

We are moving towards a digital economy in which everything relies on some kind of digital connectivity, whether it involves food production, livestock monitoring, traffic management or whatever.

There are interesting opportunities to think differently about broadband, mobile connectivity provision and charging. For example, there is a very clear desire for universal provision. How do you see a future Scotland doing universal provision?

Thank you, cabinet secretary; I will leave it there.

Good morning, cabinet secretary, and thank you for what you have said so far. I have a couple of questions that follow on from Fiona Hyslop’s questions. In our town centre and retail sector inquiry, which we are coming to the end of, and in thinking back over the winter, it has become clear that resilience is an issue. It is important to have infrastructure in place, but there is an issue about how we build into that infrastructure the resilience to cope with bad weather events such as storm Arwen and ensure that businesses and residents can move to omnichannel or multimodal interactions, whether that is home working or bricks and clicks in retail.

How does the Scottish Government ensure that we have not only the infrastructure but the support that backs up that infrastructure to ensure access to reliable and resilient connections, and fast access to the maintenance that is required if there are connectivity issues?

I realise that, as you have identified, there are challenges around what is reserved and what we have powers over.

To follow on from that, you have talked about building in connections and networks to secure resilience at local level. Are there alternative models of ownership or control that we should be looking at as well? Obviously, there is an important role for the big broadband corporations and for mobile connectivity to support what we are doing, but community ownership offers something adaptable, flexible and localised that can secure the resilience that smaller towns and villages and rural areas need. What are your thoughts on that?

That is fair enough—and that will be important as hybrid working continues after the pandemic.

I have a question about the use of the application of connectivity, whether it is broadband or mobile connectivity, which might link back to something that Fiona Hyslop was talking about. There are real economic opportunities emerging in relation to issues such as how we use 5G data to manage traffic flows, deal with accidents and better predict supply chain issues, and there are also links into health and food supplies. Where in the policy and strategy landscape is thinking happening around such issues?

Good morning, panel. Thank you for joining us this morning and for the evidence that you are providing today. I also thank the SHRC for the written evidence that it submitted prior to the meeting.

I have a couple of questions for the SHRC and Victor Madrigal-Borloz. Victor, in your opening remarks, you said that the requirements for a gender identification process include its being accessible, fast and widely available. You then said that there are other requirements that you would be prepared to elaborate on. Can you elaborate on requirements that you see as being necessary and important if we are to get the process right?

I am aware that a couple of my colleagues want to drill down into some of the data questions, and you are covering some of that. In handing back over to the convener, I say that there are different processes here: data collection processes versus the process for obtaining a GRC. I am not sure that we necessarily need to conflate them in this way. I will leave it there for now.

Thanks. That is helpful.

A moment ago, you talked about the importance of language, how it is used and the need for it to be clear and not dehumanising. I was struck by one of your earlier comments in response to one of Rachael Hamilton’s questions on data collection and people answering the sex question based on a process of self-identification or self-declaration. You likened it to the age question, and I think that you said that we do not expect people to

“make up whatever age they like.”

Are you saying that people make up whatever gender they like?

Peter Dunne, I will come to you.

You talked about the importance of the need to mix international good practice and the human rights standards with the lived experience of trans people and those who are going to be most affected by the legislation. In previous evidence sessions, we have heard about the potential for views about who will be most affected to come into conflict. In your comparative analyses, how have you drawn out any conflicts or competitive notions of impact to come to your view on reform?