Seòmar agus comataidhean

The expansion of the single building assessment pilot programme has resulted in properties in my constituency now being included, which was welcomed by affected constituents in Dundee City West. However, uncertain finances could undermine progress with the SBA. Can the cabinet secretary say more about discussions with the UK Government on consequentials? It is important that we ensure that the level of funding is sufficient to support the needs of the work that is required across Scotland.

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on its discussions with the United Kingdom Government regarding food security and supply. (S6O-01011)

I thank the cabinet secretary for her answer and for joining me last week on a visit to Dundee Cold Stores, where we heard about the additional strain that rising energy costs are putting on such businesses. It is expected that those rising costs will result in higher food prices and make it more difficult for the company to compete with European food producers. Therefore, I am pleased to hear about the cabinet secretary’s positive engagement with the UK Government on that matter.

The president of NFU Scotland, Martin Kennedy, has stated that, without proper support,

“we will be looking at food security concerns that we haven’t seen since World War Two.”

He urged shoppers to “vote with their feet” and support local produce to avert future food shortages.

What assurances can the cabinet secretary provide that the Scottish Government will continue to work with farmers and the wider food supply industry to ensure that they are provided with the necessary support and that the UK Government does not shirk its responsibilities in that regard?

I am grateful to members from across the chamber for supporting the motion.

I pay tribute to journalists Sophie Goodwin and Stephen Stewart for their investigation, which has highlighted the serious issues that are encountered by female footballers in Scotland. I will start by laying out some of its shocking findings. Sixty per cent of female respondents said that they have experienced sexism in football, and just 8 per cent of respondents said that they believe that football does enough to reduce discriminatory behaviour towards women. Those are findings that none of us should be willing to accept—as, I am sure, members here would agree.

It is critical that we call out sexism, and not just in football or other sport, but in all walks of life. We should be under no illusion: sexism is a societal issue, and not one that is present only in football. Sport has always provided a platform for unity and for social justice, so I believe and hope that sport can be part of the solution to not only sexism, but to other societal prejudices including racism and sectarianism.

Before I turn to the challenges in more detail, I note that it is important to welcome the progress that has been made in women’s football in Scotland. It is fantastic to see interest in the women’s game growing domestically and internationally. It is encouraging that our women’s national team is now playing home games at Hampden. Just last week, 7,804 fans attended Scotland’s women’s world cup qualifier with Spain, which was a record attendance for a competitive home game. I am sure that members across the chamber will join me in wishing the team every success in their remaining world cup qualifiers.

I also want to mention some of the women’s football teams in Dundee—Dundee United Women’s Football Club, Dryburgh Athletic Community Club, Dundee City West Women’s Football Club and Dundee St James Football Club. They have enjoyed some significant success of late. Dundee United have been promoted from Scottish women’s premier league 2 and Dryburgh Athletic won the championship cup. Both huge achievements have helped to inspire greater participation. However, we must accept that the women’s game—as do women, in fact—faces barriers that exist for no reason other than that the players are women.

So, what steps can be taken to eradicate sexism from football? That is a big question, but there is definitely not just one simple answer. It is important that we recognise that each and every one of us needs to lead by example: people need to take personal responsibility and adjust their behaviour. I am firmly of the belief that men, specifically, need to take responsibility and change our attitudes to football and female participation. We need to call out misogyny and sexism wherever we see it. That might be on social media, at football matches or elsewhere in society. We all need to tackle it head on, but it is important that we do so in a way that also calls on men to be part of the solution. Most clubs, players and fans see the harm, but do not know what to do, so we must work together across society to make progress. Football clubs also have a role to play.

Everyone in the chamber will be familiar with the David Goodwillie transfer earlier this season, which led to Raith Rovers Women and Girls Football Club severing ties with the men’s club and reforming as McDermid Ladies. Incidents such as that undoubtedly heavily impact on female participation in sport. There was, rightly, widespread condemnation of the transfer and McDermid Ladies have my full support. I am sure that members across the chamber will agree. Sadly, the player in question then looked set to return to Clyde Football Club, which resulted in Clyde Ladies FC deciding to fold.

Aileen Campbell, who is the chief executive officer of Scottish Women’s Football, expressed concern and called into question the decision making, which she said could see

“women side-lined or women’s clubs treated as an afterthought.”

She also made what I think is a crucial point, which was that women’s football is growing but it is fragile. As she put it,

“Without meaningful support, investment and respect women’s football will never realise its full potential.”

I welcome the Scottish Football Association’s “Accelerate our game” strategy, which seeks to increase participation to over 25,000 registered players by 2025. The ambition requires investment and it requires women being in leadership roles. Football must be equally accessible to all.

Representation is also important. As things stand, women are significantly underrepresented on professional football club boards, which is reflected in the boards of the SFA and the Scottish Professional Football League. We need to do more to get more women into senior roles in football clubs. That would give a bigger voice to women’s football, promote greater participation by women and girls and help clubs to play their part in addressing sexism.

We also need to make progress to ensure that women are represented in the media, by building on the success of Jane Lewis, Leanne Creighton, Joelle Murray, Gemma Fay and others to ensure that broadcasters play their part in showcasing women’s football. Eighty-six per cent of respondents to Sophie Goodwin’s and Stephen Stewart’s investigation said that increasing media coverage of women’s football would attract more people into the sport. If you can’t see it, you can’t be it, so representation and role models matter.

My final point is about the role that education can play. Scotland’s women’s team captain, Rachel Corsie, has said that

“she believes abusive behaviour is a wider reflection of our society and the best way to stop such incidents is to continue to educate and call out any forms of abuse.”

We have seen great work recently from campaigns such as HerGameToo and Police Scotland’s “That guy”, which ignite a powerful conversation across Scotland and call on men to make a difference by taking a hard look at our attitudes and behaviour at home, at work and when socialising. We need to build on the success and momentum of such campaigns.

Specifically, I would like clubs across Scotland to facilitate educational workshops to address sexism in football. Graham Goulden, who is a former chief inspector and key member of the Scottish violence reduction unit, facilitates workshops that adopt a bystander approach. He has worked with a range of organisations and sports clubs on how they can identify warning signs of unhealthy behaviours, and on how to empower them to use their leadership roles to promote greater choice and change. I believe that a collaboration between Graham and Scottish football clubs could be incredibly fruitful, so I encourage football clubs to reach out to him to discuss how they could work together. I hope that the Minister for Public Health, Women's Health and Sport will agree to discuss with me how the Scottish Government could help to facilitate that.

I conclude by once more thanking members from across the chamber for supporting the motion and allowing us to have the debate.

I truly believe that by working together we can tackle sexism and misogyny in football and in wider society. We all know the benefits of playing sport—it improves physical and mental health, tackles isolation and loneliness and boosts self-esteem. Those benefits should be available to everyone, regardless of gender, race or ability.

I look forward to hearing colleagues’ contributions and to hearing from the minister about the Scottish Government’s work to tackle all forms of discrimination in sport, and to increase female participation.

What role can MSIP play in delivering Scotland’s ambitious net zero targets, particularly around use of hydrogen? How much involvement has there been by, and how much support has come from, the United Kingdom Government?

I am pleased to speak in the debate as convener of the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee.

We thank all those who gave evidence to the committee, particularly the mining communities who took the time to share their experiences with us. We also thank the Coalfields Regeneration Trust and other organisations and groups for their assistance. The evidence that we heard was invaluable to our work.

I thank the clerks for supporting the committee through the scrutiny process and in the production of our stage 1 report.

The committee strongly supports the bill and we welcome the Scottish Government’s commitment to righting some of the wrongs that many communities suffered during the miners strike. The committee agrees than an automatic pardon will go some way towards providing justice for affected families.

The committee acknowledges the difficulty faced by the Scottish Government in identifying individuals who may fall within the scope of the pardon due to a lack of available records from the time. Although witnesses broadly supported an automatic pardon, the committee also heard that a letter or written statement from the Scottish Government would be welcomed by the individuals affected, and particularly by the families of miners who have now passed away.

We welcome the Scottish Government’s proposal to work with the National Union of Mineworkers to identify as many individuals as possible. The committee recommends that the Scottish Government provides a straightforward way for individuals and families to contact it directly if they consider that they fall within the scope of the pardon, for example, via the Scottish Government website. However, the committee is keen to ensure that any such steps do not delay the passage of the bill. The committee is clear that no amendments to the bill should delay its passage.

The committee report notes the difficulties faced by the Scottish Government in accurately determining the number of non-miners who were arrested while supporting miners during the strike and we accept that the definition will catch the majority of individuals affected. However, we heard from mining communities that some family members and friends who stood in solidarity with miners were also convicted as a result of the strike. The report recommends that the Scottish Government considers extending the definition in section 4, particularly in relation to family members of miners.

We also heard calls for the pardon to be extended to include actions associated with the strike that occurred in the community. On balance, we recommend that the Scottish Government should consider extending the pardon to those arrested as a result of those other activities, particularly those associated with miners’ welfare.

The committee notes that the Scottish Government went further than the recommendations of the independent review in relation to the offences included in the bill and in doing so has captured the most common offences committed during strike-related activity. We explored the scope of the offences included in section 2 and examined whether those convicted of offences under the Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act 1875 should be included. However, the committee was not able to reach agreement on whether the list of offences provided is adequate.

We heard views for and against an award of compensation for those who fall within the scope of the pardon. Our report acknowledges the significant impact of the convictions on many individuals in terms of not only loss of income through redundancy but loss of additional employment rights such as redundancy payments, pension rights and future prospects, which were prejudiced as a result of having a conviction.

Although the committee acknowledges those impacts, we note that many of the areas that would require to be addressed are reserved to the United Kingdom Government. We also acknowledge that a scheme of compensation would move the bill away from its intention of having a symbolic effect. On balance, we consider that implementation of such a scheme in Scotland would create significant practical difficulties that are likely to delay the passage of the bill and that therefore it is not the appropriate mechanism for delivering a compensation scheme. However, we note the calls that the Scottish Government has made on the UK Government to undertake a full public inquiry into the miners strike. It is the committee’s view that any inquiry should consider options for compensation for the miners and their families.

In the extensive evidence on the policing of the strike and the role of the judiciary, we heard conflicting accounts from witnesses. We agree that a full investigation into the policing and management of the strike is long overdue and should take place, and we note views on both sides as to whether the UK Government or the Scottish Government should take responsibility for an inquiry. The Scottish Government and the Scottish Parliament were not in existence at the time of the strike, although police and sheriffs were acting under a Scotland-specific system. On balance, the committee agrees that the most appropriate method of investigation is for the UK Government to hold a full public inquiry. We note calls from the Scottish Government on the UK Government to do so, and we urge both Governments to work together on that.

We heard powerful evidence of the lasting psychological and economic impacts that the strike has had on generations of communities, and that they may have never fully recovered. The impacts are still felt today, and there are calls for more to be done through investment and providing opportunities. We welcome the Scottish Government’s funding and work to date through the Coalfields Regeneration Trust, and we urge the minister to ensure that that continues.

The committee also welcomes the cabinet secretary’s commitment to take further steps and go beyond the passage of the bill, and we look forward to seeing where progress can be made. Our report also notes the Scottish Government’s commitment to continue discussions with the UK Government on taking responsibility for the suffering of the mining communities during the strike period. Last week, the cabinet secretary wrote to the committee with the Scottish Government’s response to our stage 1 report, and the offer to meet with members of the committee for discussions in advance of stage 2 is welcome.

The committee is content to recommend to the Parliament that the general principles of the bill be agreed to, and we look forward to hearing more from the Scottish Government about what further work it plans to undertake in order to continue helping to rebuild these communities.

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the Michelin Scotland Innovation Parc. (S6O-00950)

As convener of the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee, I am grateful for the opportunity to open the debate and to set out the findings of our report on petition PE1817, “End Conversion Therapy”.

The terms “conversion therapy” and “conversion practices” are used interchangeably in the report to reflect the wording that the petitioners and witnesses used. However, the committee’s preference is to use the term “conversion practices”. We consider that term to be more accurate. The word “therapy” typically suggests a benefit, whereas the evidence that we heard was clear: there is nothing beneficial about so-called conversion therapy for the individuals who are subjected to it.

The committee heard that current protective legislation is insufficient to prevent harm. Our report makes it clear that

“conversion practices are abhorrent and are not acceptable in Scotland. They should be banned.”

PE1817 was lodged in August 2020 and referred to the session 5 Equalities and Human Rights Committee, which indicated in its legacy report that the petition should be given consideration by its successor committee. Our committee agreed to undertake an inquiry into the issues that the petition raised. We launched a call for views, which ran from 6 July to 13 August 2021. We received about 1,400 responses, predominantly from individuals. We held eight evidence sessions, in addition to which we held private informal sessions with individuals who had experienced conversion practices.

On behalf of the committee, I thank everyone who gave evidence in writing and orally. In particular, I thank the individuals who provided testimony of their experiences as victims and survivors of conversion practices. It took immense courage to recount those experiences. Committee members found the testimonies harrowing but invaluable to our work.

A key issue that was identified during our evidence taking and on which there was broad agreement, including from people who support a ban and people who express concerns about a ban, was the need for a clear definition of “conversion therapy” or “conversion practices”. The terms are generally understood to refer to practices that demonstrate

“an assumption that any particular sexual orientation or gender identity is inherently preferable to another, and ... attempt to bring about a change of sexual orientation or gender identity or seek to suppress an individual’s expression of sexual orientation or gender identity on that basis.”

The committee

“recommends that the definition used in the Report on Conversion Therapy by the UN Independent Expert on protection against violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity, should be adopted”.

It is also anxious to ensure that, similar to the approach in legislation to protect victims of domestic abuse and female genital mutilation, the definition of “conversion practices” in forthcoming legislation

“makes it clear that consent to such practices can never be informed and should not be available as a defence to those who undertake such practices.“

The majority of the religious organisations from which we heard are in favour of a ban on conversion practices. The committee said that

“It agrees that legislation should not pose any restrictions on ordinary religious teaching or the right of people to take part in prayer or pastoral care to discuss, explore or come to terms with their identity in a non-judgmental and non-directive way.”

However, we noted that we

“heard evidence that most conversion practices take place within a religious setting including in the form of ‘talking therapy’ which is used with the intention to ‘correct’ sexuality or gender. The Committee believes and recommends that such practices should fall within a ban.”

The committee also heard from many survivors of conversion practices persuasive evidence that their faith is part of their identity, and that they have felt that they have been forced to choose between faith and their sexual orientation or gender identity, which can have a devastating impact. The committee believes that

“it is vital to involve religious and community leaders as a Bill progresses, and that education and awareness is crucial to promote acceptance of diversity.”

We recommend that the Scottish Government

“engages with a wide range of faith and belief organisations in order both to protect LGBT people”

and address concerns around protecting religious freedom. The committee agrees that

“there is no conflict in protecting religious freedom and preventing harm by putting a ban in place.”

The committee

“notes that the majority of healthcare bodies in the UK have signed the Memorandum of Understanding”,

which is a joint document that has been signed by health, counselling and psychotherapy organisations, including NHS Scotland, which aims to end the practice of conversion therapy in the UK. One witness told us that they were aware of a “limited number of instances” of alleged conversion practices in medical settings and that they wish to see a ban on that, where there is an intention to change someone’s sexuality or gender identity.

The committee agrees that affirmative therapies,

“where individuals are seeking support and a space to explore their identity”

in a non-directive setting, and where no set or preferred outcome is intended, should be protected under the ban. We heard evidence, however, that there is some confusion and misunderstanding around the term “affirmative therapy”. It would be helpful for clarity on that to be provided to the medical profession, counselling services and wider society.

Concerns were expressed to the committee about the rights of parents to bring up their children in a way that is consistent with their moral and religious beliefs. The committee believes that

“there is a clear distinction to be made between parents having the right to bring up their children in line with their morals and values and having the directed intent to change their child’s sexuality, or gender identity.”

The committee agrees that

“any proposals should not pose restrictions on parents or schools to provide a safe space for discussion and exploration but should prohibit harmful practices which attempt to change a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity, including trans identities.”

The UK Government has indicated that it plans to publish draft legislation in the spring of this year, which would cover England and Wales. The committee agrees that

“Scotland should not wait for UK legislation to be brought forward and considers that, within the powers available to the Scottish Government and Parliament, Scotland-specific legislation be brought forward as soon as possible.”

The committee welcomes the Scottish Government’s commitment to introduce legislation by the end of 2023, and the establishment of the expert advisory group to inform and develop policy. We recognise that

“work will be necessary to ensure the development of cross-border frameworks”

and we call on the UK Government

“to work with the Scottish Government and Scottish Parliament on a ban.”

The committee agrees that prospective legislation should set out a fully comprehensive ban on conversion practices and should

“cover sexual orientation and gender identity, including trans identities.”

It should

“cover adults and children in all settings without exception and include”

so-called consensual conversion practices. The committee also recommends that a ban should include

“a ban on advertising and promotion of conversion practices.”

The committee also

“heard strongly expressed views that legislation alone will not be sufficient to address conversion practices and that non-legislative measures will also be necessary to protect and support victims.”

The committee heard a broad range of suggestions for supported measures that could complement legislation. Paragraphs 154 to 157 of our report set some of those out in detail.

The committee further

“noted concerns around how enforcement of a ban could be effective and believes that consideration should be given to how this role could be fulfilled by a public body to ensure investigation, enforcement and accountability”

are possible. The committee is keen to ensure that time is not wasted gathering identical evidence from the same victims as it heard from during its private evidence sessions, because that might have the unintended consequence of retraumatising victims. We therefore ask the Scottish Government to work with the committee in that regard.

The committee

“is mindful of the volume of evidence that is already available, including the written and oral evidence it has received”,

and we consider that it is important to introduce legislation promptly. In our report, we stated that we would welcome discussions with the Scottish Government on working together to introduce a ban “as quickly as possible.” I welcome the minister’s letter of 10 March, offering to progress discussions with the committee on next steps, and I look forward to that further engagement.

On behalf of the committee, I thank the minister and her officials for the detailed response that they have provided to each of our recommendations, and for the assurance that the recommendations will be progressed through the work of the expert advisory group.

I highlight once more the impact of the sessions that we held with individuals who have experienced conversion practices. Although the formal written and oral evidence that we received helped our consideration of the actions that are being called for in the petition, it was the testimony of each of those individuals that really impressed on us the need for legislation to be introduced as soon as possible.

I move,

That the Parliament notes the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee’s 1st Report, 2022, (Session 6), Report on Petition PE1817: End Conversion Therapy (SP Paper 88).

This is an area that the minister and I have a particular interest in and are particularly keen to make progress on. The minister mentioned that the alcohol-related death rate in the most deprived areas in Scotland is 4.3 times higher than in the least deprived areas. The minister will be aware of the report on alcohol-problem management in deep-end practices serving the most deprived populations in Scotland, which was launched today by Scottish Health Action on Alcohol Problems, and she will be aware that it shows the value and effectiveness of the primary care alcohol nurse outreach service in reducing alcohol harms. Will the minister say whether the Scottish Government would encourage all deep-end practices to adopt a similar model?

As a member of the cross-party selection panel that was established by the Presiding Officer under our standing orders, I am delighted to speak to the motion in my name, which invites members to agree to nominate Ian Duddy to Her Majesty the Queen for appointment as the chair of the Scottish Human Rights Commission. I chaired the selection panel, whose other members were Karen Adam, Maggie Chapman, Pam Duncan-Glancy and Meghan Gallacher.

As members will be aware, the Scottish Human Rights Commission is the national human rights institution for Scotland. Its role is to promote human rights and, in particular, to encourage best practice in relation to human rights.

The panel’s nominee, Ian Duddy, is a senior civil servant and former United Kingdom ambassador. From 2011 to 2016, he led the UK team at the United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva, working closely with civil society, Governments and national human rights institutions. He has worked in Europe, South America and Afghanistan on issues including child safeguarding, gender, education and freedom of expression. He is currently the head of the human rights and rule of law department at the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office.

The panel believes that Ian’s blend of skills, knowledge and experience will make him an excellent chair and will ensure that the commission fulfils its statutory functions, in partnership with the part-time members of the commission, that positive working relations with stakeholders are built and maintained and that the office is run efficiently and effectively.

I thank the outgoing chair of the commission, Judith Robertson, who demits office later this month, for her many achievements during her term in office. I wish her all the very best for the future.

I move,

That the Parliament nominates Ian Duddy to Her Majesty The Queen for appointment as the Chair of the Scottish Human Rights Commission.