Seòmar agus comataidhean

I have a supplementary question. We do not know exactly what the UK Government legislation will be in that area but, from our panel of witnesses last week, we heard tentative concerns about how it might be impacted by certain types of lobbying. Based on what you said, there is scope for the Scottish Parliament to go further and be more robust in the legislation that we bring out, given the concerns that have already been raised on the record and to the committee.

Sorry, convener—I have a supplementary question on a current issue in the same area.

I thank you for that response, cabinet secretary. You were pretty clear, and it was good to get that on the record.

My final question relates to a matter that affects people in my constituency and throughout the country, but particularly those in the west of Scotland, and which particularly centres around specific football games. It relates to the anti-Catholic or anti-Irish racism that is sometimes seen. I know that that can be more of a criminal justice issue and that what we see on social media and the queries that we get about it can perhaps require police action. Is education on such discrimination part of the plans that you are progressing and the action that you are taking? Education will be crucial if we are going to tackle the issue properly.

That point has been made clearly by this panel and the panel at last week’s committee meeting. It is helpful to have it on the record again.

I had a round-up question to finish on, but I think that a lot of the issues have been covered. However, I will look at a specific angle.

The witnesses have talked about those we might be able to hear from to inform the committee further, and they have talked a lot about getting in people with lived experience, which I agree is very important. The clerking teams in this and other parliamentary committees are good at ensuring that that happens in a safe space. I know that from being a member of committees in the previous parliamentary session, and I am sure that we will make that happen.

Can the witnesses expand on the value they think the committee will get from hearing from those people? The answer might seem obvious, but it would be good to get it on the record. What do you think the value of that will be for the committee in taking the petition forward?

I agree with Pam Gosal that this seems to be a very difficult subject—certainly online.

We have talked a lot about engagement, and 17,000 responses seems to be a fairly large response. Will the cabinet secretary comment on the most recent poll on the issue and on many other subjects—I mean the election, of course—and on the manifestos of all the political parties that were elected to Parliament? How important is it that political parties commit to their manifestos when the Parliament restarts its work?

I have a range of questions in the same area, so if anyone else has a supplementary, I can wait.

I was thinking that as well, convener, and I got a good cover on it. Like Pam Duncan-Glancy, I declare an interest, as I also signed the end conversion therapy petition during the election campaign.

Megan Snedden has already given a good overview of the issues and, given what the convener said, I do not want folk to have to go over things, but I wonder whether any of the other panel members want to talk about the complexities of legislation, such as what the UK Government is likely to legislate on, what we can legislate on and how those areas might interact, where that interaction might hold us back and where it might present opportunities to go further. Does anyone want to elaborate on the points that have already been made or bring new points to the table?

Thank you. I see by your fellow witnesses nodding their heads that they are very much in agreement.

I was going to ask about the public sector leadership summit on race equality and employment, so I am glad that the cabinet secretary included some comments on that in a previous answer. That issue is really important. As she mentioned, our predecessor committee held an inquiry into the topic, and it is good to hear that the work is being progressed.

I will move on to the Gypsy Traveller action plan. It is worth putting on record that, in the previous parliamentary session, Christina McKelvie, who is not here today, and Mary Fee were big advocates in that area. Will you comment on current progress with the action plan? Is there any evidence that it is having a positive impact on the lives of Gypsy Travellers?

Thank you. With the convener’s permission, I confirm that that would be helpful.

On the same topic, cabinet secretary, I want to draw your attention to a newspaper article that I saw today on Christina McKelvie’s social media. Referring to the UK Government, the article has the shocking headline:

“Government says discrimination against black people and Travellers ‘objectively justified’ with new laws”.

Under the headline, it says:

“Documents defend disproportionate impact of Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill”.

I do not know whether you have seen that. I do not expect you to comment if you have not, but I wonder whether, broadly speaking, I can seek an assurance that our Government in Scotland will not seek to have a similar response or ideology, given all the work that you have outlined.