Chamber and committees

I appreciate that.

I suppose that that figure is even before talk about the costs of adaptation. I know that other people want to talk about finance, so I will leave it there for now.

The Scottish Human Rights Commission is not the only commission that is talking about sharing services such as payroll and back-office functions.

Jim Farish, in your newish role, how do you find the balance between the strategic work that you and your fellow commissioners are asked to do and the operational side, which Ian Duddy heads up? Notwithstanding the requests for additional staff that Ian has outlined, have we got the balance right between strategy and operations?

That is helpful. I will ask one more question, if I may. There have been discussions about having commissioners for other bits of rights. How do you view the SHRC’s role as an overarching body? How do you see that role developing?

I will leave it there.

That is helpful. Ian Duddy, you talked about the shift from 12.5 to 14.5 members of staff, which you described as “steady state”. Given what is coming at us all with the human rights bill, incorporation and the distinct legal and constitutional challenges around that, never mind just the human rights bit, when you say “steady state”, how much additional resource do you anticipate needing? I know that you will have started some of those conversations with staff who support you in the Parliament, but where are those conversations going?

Thank you very much for that clarity.

Thanks for your comments, Ian. In your initial response to Pam Gosal’s question, you said that you stand by the evidence that you gave in June. During the same meeting, we also heard from the UN independent expert on protection against violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity, Victor Madrigal-Borloz. In his evidence, he was quite clear that, in the work that he has undertaken, the so-called competition of rights has come up before. He said that he has found no evidence to support that there is

“any systemic identifiable pattern of risk in ... the situation that is created by ... self-identification.”—[Official Report, Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee, 21 June 2022, c27-28]

Does the SHRC agree with that view of the situation, and, from your understanding of other countries where legal recognition by self-identification works, have you heard any evidence to suggest that there can be conflict, as the letter by Reem Alsalem suggested?

Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining us.

Ian Duddy, I follow on from Pam Duncan-Glancy’s line of questioning on staffing. How is the commission, at the moment? We have been through Covid and its impact—some of which we have talked about—and, as you outlined in your opening remarks, there has been a significant amount of organisational change, about which I have a few questions. I am interested in how the staff in your team are feeling.

I should declare that, as a member of the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body, I will be scrutinising the budget bid that you have put in for next year.

The cabinet secretary will be aware that this is just the latest in a long list of events that call into question the leadership of NHS Tayside and cause people to question the care that they might receive. That is not good for any of our public services. The cabinet secretary has also indicated that he does not think that a public inquiry is necessary. I think that many of us disagree with him. If not an independent investigation, what kind of open, transparent and independent process does he consider necessary to restore people’s trust and confidence in the service?