Chamber and committees

With respect Rachael, we are about to move on to Maggie Chapman’s questions. I will let Maggie come in first. I did ask whether your questions were about the same topic, but I do not think they were. I hope that both questions will blend together, but we will start with Maggie.

Thanks for that, Pinar. The pictures on the telly were absolutely horrific. If anybody ever pretends that racism is not a problem in Scotland, we can say that we saw it on our TV screens. You are absolutely right to raise the question of how we can tackle that to make sure that people feel welcome. I think that all politicians want people to feel welcome, but we saw on the telly what people can experience.

That is a brilliant point on which to finish. We might have to think about how we can focus on your final point about treating everyone equitably.

I thank everyone for their time. We could probably have gone on all day. As well as answering lots of questions and helping to educate us, you have raised more questions in our minds about how we take this work forward. Thank you.

We have concluded the budget part of our meeting, but there are one or two issues that you have covered that we want to follow up on.

In answer to Fulton MacGregor, you mentioned the conversion practices working group. Obviously, the committee takes a close interest in that area. When we produced our report on the matter, we were clear that we need the work to move forward at pace. It would be good to get an update on the timings, just to confirm that we are still expecting a bill on the issue by the end of this year.

The committee was also clear that the legislation in Scotland needs to be inclusive of all—in particular, trans inclusive—and we have seen a shift in the United Kingdom Government towards that position. It would be good to hear your comment on that.

We were also clear that there should be no loopholes and that it is not possible to consent to what is, in effect, torture. It looks as though there is still a disparity between the Scottish position and the UK Government’s position in that regard. Are there any discussions with the UK Government on that? Might the UK Government be moving in that area as well, to be more aligned with the views that the committee and the Scottish Parliament have expressed?

I am looking around to see whether any members are keen to come in.

Welcome to the third meeting in 2023, in session 6, of the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee. We have received no apologies this morning.

Under agenda item 1, we must decide whether to take in private item 6, which is consideration of today’s budget evidence. Do we agree to take that item in private?

Members indicated agreement.

That concludes consideration of the affirmative Scottish statutory instrument.

Do members agree to the clerks producing a short factual report on our deliberations on the affirmative instrument that we have considered today?

Members indicated agreement.

I thank the minister and her officials for attending.

Item 5 on our agenda is budget scrutiny 2023-24. I refer members to paper 3. I welcome Christina McKelvie, the Minister for Equalities and Older People. The minister is accompanied by Rob Priestley, head of the mainstreaming and strategy unit in the Scottish Government directorate for equality, inclusion and human rights, and Ben Walsh, head of budget improvement at the Scottish exchequer. I invite the minister to make an opening statement, before we move to questions.

Superb. Thanks very much, including for that slightly wider introduction. We might have one or two questions on some of the wider matters. First, however, we want to focus on the budget.

One of the themes that came up in our early pre-budget meetings with stakeholders, and in the meeting yesterday, was the accessibility of the budget—for instance, EasyRead versions. Last week, in particular, we heard just how welcome the document “Your Scotland, Your Finances: 2022-23 Scottish Budget” was. However, there was a little concern that that document, which made the budget much more understandable and accessible to more people, was not available at the same time as the budget was launched. Will you comment on that? Maybe Rob Priestley will give us a flavour of the work that is going on to make sure that, at all times when such budget decisions are being made, accessibility is at the fore.