Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee

Meeting date: Thursday, April 20, 2017

Official Report 394KB pdf

---

Cross-party Groups

Item 3 is on cross-party groups. The first group that we have to consider today is the proposed cross-party group on WASPI—women against state pension inequality. I welcome Richard Leonard MSP to the meeting and invite him, as co-convener of the proposed group, to make an opening statement.

Thank you for inviting me this morning. The cross-party group on women against state pension inequality has two formidable conveners in the shape of Jackie Baillie MSP and Sandra White MSP. The group arises from a grass-roots campaign that was sparked off in 2015 in response to the implications of the Pensions Act 1995 and the Pensions Act 2011, which accelerated the state retirement age for women from 60 to 65, and then to 66 and 67. The controversy arose because there was little or no individual notification of the changes and considerable concerns that the original timetable had been accelerated, leaving many women little time to prepare.

It is estimated that around a quarter of a million women in Scotland alone were born in the 1950s and are affected by the pension changes. There are 24 local WASPI groups throughout Scotland, from Sutherland in the north to Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk in the south. The secretariat for the cross-party group will be provided by one of the activists in the Lanarkshire group, Anne Potter. The cross-party nature of the group is demonstrated in our submission. It includes Patrick Harvie MSP and Alison Johnstone MSP from the Scottish Green Party, three Scottish Labour members and four MSPs from the Scottish National Party. We do not think that the cross-party group will especially overlap with any existing cross-party groups. There will be occasions when cross-fertilisation would be helpful. For example, Sandra White and I are on the cross-party group on older people, age and ageing and it may be that there will be some shared interests there.

The main purpose of the group is to raise awareness, not just inside Parliament but outside it. There are still women out there in Scotland who do not know that they are affected by the changes. We see ourselves as having a role in trying to raise awareness. The WASPI campaign’s demand is pretty straightforward. It is for fair transitional arrangements to be put in place for all women born in the 1950s who are affected by the changes. In short, it is a demand for justice and equality. We think that this Parliament is close to and in touch with the people. This is an issue of grave concern to a large number of women in Scotland and the group is precisely the kind of cross-party group that we think the Parliament should initiate.

Thank you, Mr Leonard. Are there any questions from the committee regarding the group?

This is a very important issue and well worth the focus of a CPG. I will look at your future work with interest.

The group is a great idea. There is a Dumfries and Galloway WASPI group, which might not be aware that it needs to connect up with everybody. If the CPG goes ahead, I am happy to make the Dumfries and Galloway group aware of it.

I thank Richard Leonard for his attendance this morning. The committee will consider, under item 5, whether to approve the application for recognition, and you will be informed of our decision as quickly as possible.

The second group for consideration today is the proposed CPG on inflammatory bowel disease. I welcome Colin Smyth MSP to the meeting. Colin is a member of the proposed group. I should declare an interest as I, too, am a member of the proposed group. I invite Mr Smyth to make an opening statement.

I thank the committee for the invitation this morning.

Inflammatory bowel disease is the collective term that we use for Crohn’s disease and ulcerative disease, which are lifelong conditions that can develop at any age but usually do so in people’s teens and early 20s. IBD affects approximately 300,000 people in the United Kingdom—one in 210—with 18,000 new cases diagnosed every year. In Scotland, 26,000 people are diagnosed with the condition, which is the highest rate of IBD in the UK. One of the main reasons why the CPG was proposed is that few people are aware of the number of people who are affected by what can be an incredibly debilitating condition. A core aim of the group is to raise awareness of the high incidence of IBD and the impact that living with the condition has on sufferers’ lives.

As well as raising awareness of IBD and its effects, the CPG aims to be a forum for third sector organisations and health professionals to share best practice and the diagnosis, research and treatment of inflammatory bowel disease. A major focus of the group’s work would be on promoting and monitoring the implementation of the national blueprint for IBD in Scotland, which was produced through a collaboration between Crohn’s and Colitis UK, the national health service, health professionals and patients, and the Scottish Government. The blueprint is key to delivering the Scottish Government’s commitment that those in Scotland living with IBD are able to access the best possible treatment and support.

Currently there are no other groups in Parliament looking at the issues that are specifically faced by people with IBD. Lifetime treatment of IBD per individual affected is comparable to the cost of the treatment of other major diseases, such as diabetes and cancer. However, at present it is a condition that does not receive a great deal of attention. We therefore feel that the CPG is very much in the public interest and that it will make a useful and practical contribution to the development of treatments and services for those suffering from IBD, while raising awareness of the condition across Scotland.

Thank you. I invite any questions from members.

Good morning, Mr Smyth. You have hit the nail on the head when you say that the group will try to raise awareness of the condition. How will you get the message across to the various sectors? You have indicated in your application that a number of organisations will participate. Will any one of those organisations take a lead in the process to ensure geographic coverage?

The secretariat will be provided by Crohn’s and Colitis UK, which has increased its work in Scotland. It has a member of staff funded through the Health and Social Care Alliance Scotland, one of whose key roles is to lead raising awareness throughout Scotland. One of the first pieces of work that we want to do is to raise awareness across health boards in Scotland. For example, we have invited the chair of the health board chief executives group to come to a future meeting, to make him aware of concerns of people who suffer from the condition, and of the fact that there is a postcode lottery, with different treatments in different parts of Scotland. One of the key things for the group is that it includes individuals who suffer from the condition, and I have to say that the stories that we heard from them at the first meeting were harrowing. We want to raise awareness of how the condition impacts on individuals and their lives, and that will be a key part of the role of the group.

Thank you. I wish you well.

I thank Colin Smyth for attending. We will consider whether to approve the application for recognition under item 5, and you will be informed of our decision as quickly as possible.

The final group that we have to consider today is a proposed cross-party group on freedom of religion or belief. I welcome John Mason MSP, the proposed convener of the group, and invite him to make an opening statement.

I thank the committee for considering this cross-party group for approval. As members may know, there was previously a similar cross-party group on religious freedom, which was led by Dave Thompson, but we deliberately did not carry it on and wanted to restart in a slightly different format, although there will be similarities. We considered different options and discussed them at our inaugural meeting, but we came up with the phrase

“freedom of religion or belief”,

which is somewhat wider than the previous title, which only mentioned religion.

Members have the registration form, and I can only apologise for not properly notifying the clerks about our inaugural meeting. That was an oversight on my part and the part of my office. I also realised when I was looking at the form this morning that Alex Cole-Hamilton is down as a Conservative, and obviously he is not, so I apologise to him. We have at least one MSP from each of the five parties, which is quite encouraging. The deputy convener is to be Murdo Fraser, and we now have a secretariat in place, which is Interfaith Scotland, although that was not the case at the time when we completed the form.

Religion is a major part of many people’s lives, both in Scotland and around the world, and it is a major reason why people around the world are having a difficult time in quite a number of countries. There is no other CPG that specifically looks at religion, although I agree that it can touch on many areas. To take North Korea as an example, it would be at the top of most people’s lists for being an oppressive regime, and religious people in that country—or anyone who does not agree with the regime—can have an extremely difficult time. A cross-party group cannot solve those problems, but we can air them. We can discuss the situation and how people are suffering in such countries, so I hope that the committee will approve the group. I am happy to take questions.

I am looking at the new title, compared with the title of the previous group that covered this area. The previous group was criticised for being focused on freedom of religion in a narrow way, and for not encompassing freedom from religion, and the phrase “religious freedom” should cover both. How do you expect the work of this group to differ? Is its remit intentionally broader? I notice that there are no non-religious belief organisations yet listed in the group’s membership. How do you anticipate that changing?

We are open to anybody being part of the group and attending if they want to. We have been in touch with the Humanist Society Scotland, which was invited to the first meeting but declined to come. It was only at that first meeting that we decided exactly what the remit would be, and perhaps some people had thought that it would just be about religion. As you have noted, we are specifically widening our remit and would be happy to take anyone who wants to be a member—MSPs, individuals and organisations.

However, I would also say that I think that religion can be overlooked in some circles and the group will focus on religion, if not exclusively. Within religions, there are clearly different experiences. Muslims in Myanmar, for example, are facing a difficult time, as are Falun Gong in China, but the main group that is being persecuted around the world is Christians, so there is likely to be a focus on that.

10:00  

Regardless of whether any particular organisations choose to get involved, you would say that the remit covers not only the freedom of people to practise religion but the right of people to be free from having religion imposed on them?

Absolutely, because leaving a religion for another religion or leaving a religion for no religion are areas of concern.

Or never having had one.

I see that most of the group’s focus is going to be on the international aspect, but the application says that the group could

“look at issues in Scotland and the UK”.

What might some of those issues be, and do you anticipate any difficulties arising from conflicts or tensions between religion and other equality strands? How might you deal with those?

That raises a range of issues. We have left the remit deliberately open, but my thinking, and that of the previous group, was on the situation overseas. I have mentioned the Equality Act 2010 and, as it happens, I was involved in that act going through Westminster. There can be a tension between the different protected characteristics because they were not ranked and neither does the act say that they are all equal. When the act was written, that was an inherent flaw in it. It should have said that everything was equal or that there was some kind of ranking.

I accept that there can be tensions, but I doubt very much that this group will get into that kind of thing, because we are focusing on the religious. If a situation did arise in which some people had a problem with being religious—one of my colleagues was criticised for having ash on her forehead on Ash Wednesday—it would be of interest, but I do not think that such things will be the main focus of the group.

The group in the previous parliamentary session had an organisation appointed to provide its secretariat. I do not see a decision on that in the paper. Have you considered the criticisms that were made of the organisation that was chosen in the previous session? It cites its founder as saying that its purpose includes

“to heal the wounds inflicted by atheism”.

Have you considered that and reflected on whether it was appropriate?

Maybe that is one of the reasons why we have decided to start a new group rather than continuing with the previous one. I see the group as a new group. We discussed the secretariat at the initial meeting. Unfortunately, Interfaith Scotland could not attend the meeting, so we could not decide on the day. Everybody felt that it would be an appropriate group because, by its very name, it is interfaith. When we asked Interfaith Scotland, it said that the request would have to go through its board and it has now agreed to provide secretariat support.

I certainly think that that would be an improvement.

I will let you judge that.

Thank you.

As there are no further questions, I thank John Mason for his attendance. The committee will consider whether to approve the application for recognition at item 5 and you will be informed of our decision as quickly as possible. Thank you for your attendance.