Seòmar agus comataidhean

Amendment 151 complements my previous amendment 156. I have outlined to the committee the rationale and purpose of those amendments in relation to occupational requirement exceptions, and I emphasise that my amendments are about ensuring that rights in the Equality Act 2010 can be exercised.

Although I am pleased that the cabinet secretary has indicated support for amendment 156, notwithstanding the potential for amendment at stage 3, amendment 151 would commit the Government to produce guidance on occupational requirement exceptions that clearly sets out the interaction between the bill, schedule 9 to the 2010 act and, crucially, section 22 of the 2004 act. Although, in the previous discussion, the cabinet secretary set out the basis on which exemptions can happen, I hope that she recognises that section 22 is having a chilling effect on the operation of those exemptions.

Although the Equality and Human Rights Commission has issued guidance on occupational requirement exceptions, the interpretation of that guidance in public bodies across Scotland is leading to confusion, as Pauline McNeill outlined in her contribution. The Government might argue that it is not its role to issue guidance, but it is not unusual for additional guidance to be issued. For example, the Equality and Human Rights Commission provides guidance on discrimination for schools in respect of the 2010 act. Education Scotland says that the guidance

“provides an authoritative, comprehensive and technical guide to the detail of the law”

and

“an overview of the obligations”.

It describes the guidance as

“an essential reference which should be used both to develop and review policy.”

Furthermore, in a briefing for stage 2, the EHRC said that the UK and Scottish Governments

“must also ensure clarity for employers and service providers on the law.”

Therefore, I do not believe that it is outwith the boundaries of the Scottish Government’s powers to provide clarity on those issues. I go back to the quotation that I gave from the Government’s 2019 consultation: with regard to the scenario of information being held by an HR department, the Government consultation said that it is

“appropriate for information about a person’s trans history to be shared in a strictly limited, proportionate and legitimate way.”

It would provide much-needed clarity were the Government to set out that assurance in guidance, which employers could use on the occasion that they wished to exercise an occupational exemption, which they are able to do with the support of the 2010 act when it is proportionate for a legitimate aim.

The provision of such guidance would also provide clarity for service users, as it would emphasise the EHRC guidance and would make clear the circumstances in which they could expect an occupational exemption to be considered. That would provide clarity for the provision of single-sex services and, although there might still be questions or challenges, the legal framework in which decisions are taken would be made clear.

I very much agree with Jamie Greene. That is why I lodged amendment 151, which is in the following group and is on guidance. This is specifically about a review to try to get clarity on how the acts interact.

The amendment would require the Government to review the operation of section 22 and consider whether a criminal offence remains relevant and whether further exemptions within devolved powers are necessary to ensure the effective operation of schedule 9 to the Equality Act 2010. As the then Scottish Executive introduced exemptions through the Gender Recognition (Disclosure of Information) (Scotland) Order 2005, I believe that that is within the Scottish Government’s powers. I stress that the expectation is that any further exemptions would still apply to only a limited set of circumstances. My amendment also requires the Government to explain the reasons why it is not taking action.

I welcome the discussions about the amendment that I have had with the cabinet secretary. It is a redrafted version of amendment 150 in order to provide a clear and competent amendment, and I hope that it will find support from members.

That is helpful. The committee might decide to follow up on that issue in the future.

That brings us to the end of the evidence session. I thank all the witnesses for coming along and sharing their knowledge and expertise.

Thank you. I will begin by asking some questions about progress on fair work. You mentioned the report card that was published in December 2020, where the convention raised concerns about lack of progress on realising the 2025 vision. In March 2021, the convention warned that, unless the Scottish Government took urgent action, the vision would not be realised.

Have you seen the urgent action that you called for since then? Are there actions that the Government needs to take forward to make sure that we reach the 2025 target? Why has progress in some areas been so slow?

Good morning, and welcome to the Economy and Fair Work Committee’s 26th meeting in 2022. No apologies have been received.

Our first item of business is a decision on whether to take item 3 in private. Are members content to take that item in private?

Members indicated agreement.

I am going to change the order of questions and bring in Jamie Halcro Johnston, as his question is relevant, I think, to what we have heard so far. I will then come to Colin Smyth.

You have started to address issues that other members will want to pick up on. The convention’s report of December 2020 said that the Covid-19 crisis

“laid bare much of the unfairness in our economy”

and that

“even before the pandemic, limited progress was being made in improving key fair work indicators.”

The refreshed plan is due out quite soon—I think that it was meant to have been out in the autumn. Will it be able to address the existing unfairness, which has been added to by the pandemic? Will that be the plan’s focus, or will its focus be elsewhere in terms of addressing any gaps?

What would you like to see in the plan when it comes out?

Our next item of businesses is an evidence-taking session with the Fair Work Convention. The purpose of the session is to provide members with an introduction to the convention’s work and to discuss with it the challenges and opportunities that businesses and workers face.

I welcome Mary Alexander and Patricia Findlay, who are co-chairs of the Fair Work Convention. They are joined by Helen Martin, who is head of the convention secretariat.

As always, I ask members and witnesses to keep their questions and answers as short and concise as possible.

I invite Mary Alexander to make a short opening statement.

Thank you. I will bring in Graham Simpson.