Seòmar agus comataidhean

After this session, we will have the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government and the Minister for Equalities in front of the committee. You said that there needs to be a drive from the committee—from the Parliament—and the Scottish Government. In relation to the question, what would you like us to address when the cabinet secretary and the minister come in front of us?

Okay. Thank you.

I hear you, minister. I am not disputing what you say about organisations such as the Scottish Refugee Council and the need to ensure that people who are the most marginalised have a voice, but this committee is about scrutiny and accountability. Today’s session is about accountability, and you cannot delegate accountability.

It has recently been reported that, since 2017, the SNP Government has given £20 million of handouts from the public purse—taxpayers’ money—to third sector organisations that support self-identification. My question to the minister, and to the cabinet secretary, is: will Scottish ministers commit to working with Inspiring Scotland and other relevant parties to withdraw funding from groups that promote unlawful policies? Some of the policies that they are promoting are not only unsafe but unlawful.

You have not answered the question. You said earlier that you will look at organisations that are not spending the money where you have directed that they spend the money, which is laudable and important, because it is taxpayers’ money. On the £20 million, the question was: will you make sure that funding is withdrawn from organisations that are breaking the law? Will you ask Inspiring Scotland, which is your fund manager, to make sure that it does a stock check of those organisations that are breaking the law? That is the question.

In the previous evidence session, we heard the Scottish Human Rights Commission talk about quality assurance. Will the Scottish Government—you are the cabinet secretary, and we have the minister here, too—ensure that there is quality assurance so that the organisations that you fund are not operating unlawfully? That is my final question.

I will pass back to the convener.

In the interests of time, convener, I will pass back to you.

Thank you. This evidence session is about accountability. You used the terms “should be”, “obliged”, “must” and “minimum protections”. Yet, the Scottish Human Rights Commission has been operating for 17 years without any legal enforcement powers, and its remit is still based on the legislation that created it, the Scottish Commission for Human Rights Act 2006. Scottish National Party ministers, including yourself, have recently shelved the human rights bill that could have at least given the SHRC some teeth, which it needs because it cannot otherwise enforce. How can the SNP Government claim that it is committed to human rights when it has not delivered the legislation to improve scrutiny of its human rights record?

My question is a supplementary on the equality and fairer Scotland budget statement. There is a published analysis by protected characteristic. The minister talked about the importance of looking at data by protected characteristic.

Let me take breastfeeding as an example of a minimum core standard. Breastfeeding inequalities, relating to the protected characteristic of pregnancy and maternity, are highlighted on page 19 of the report. If the Scottish Government is serious about tackling breastfeeding inequalities, which affect young mothers and those from deprived areas, why are vital support services in NHS Lothian and Greater Glasgow and Clyde, for example, being cut?

My questions are on the theme of the third sector and accountability. My colleague talked about accountability and who is responsible. There is a big emphasis on lived experience. I will give the example of an accountant. An accountant can have lived experience of accounts, but that does not make them a formally qualified accountant.

I have three questions in relation to the delegation of accountability in the third sector. My first question is about an organisation, Scottish Trans, which is funded by the SNP Government and which has publicly argued that men can breastfeed babies despite the risks to the infant and the risks of synthetic hormone-induced secretions. That has not been clinically trialled because of the risks.

Pregnant and breastfeeding women face huge restrictions on what they can eat and drink. A recent example that one mother gave me was that pregnant women cannot even have a Lemsip Max. Pregnant women are being told that there are restrictions on what they can eat, drink and put into their bodies. However, Scottish Trans is advocating for a process that uses synthetic hormones. It openly criticises the Equality and Human Rights Commission for a perceived lack of protection for men who want to “breastfeed”. The whole thing, minister and cabinet secretary, is unsafe and completely bonkers.

Earlier, I referenced the cuts to breastfeeding support services for women that have been made because of the SNP Government’s funding decisions. Why are ministers continuing to fund Scottish Trans, given that its position is undermining health and safety and evidenced-based policy making?