Equal Opportunities Committee, 21 Feb 2006

Meeting date: Tuesday, February 21, 2006

Official Report 370KB pdf

---

Equalities Review

Agenda item 2 is the committee's equalities review. Today we are considering the research proposal for the first part of the review. Are members happy with the proposal? Do you have any comments? I think that John Swinburne has a comment.

I will be brief, and I am sorry to take up the committee's time. I will read out this paper as quickly as I can. It is for consideration by the Equal Opportunities Committee, with regard to the proposed schedule.

I would like to take issue with the basic fact that the most important strand of equality is not even on our agenda. Although I agree that age, disability, gender, race, religion and sexual orientation are all extremely important issues that must feature prominently in all our deliberations, I contend that we are missing the greatest factor and the one that impacts most on inequality—poverty.

Poverty is the root cause of the majority of inequalities for the citizens of Scotland. It can, and does, make the difference between life and death. Just ask the families of the 8,000 and more pensioners who have died of winter-related causes in the past few years. Most schoolchildren—

John, may I stop you—

Wait until I have finished.

What you are saying is not relevant.

It is very relevant.

It is not relevant to what we are talking about.

It is very relevant.

If you are going to be brief, you may continue and—

What I am saying is very relevant.

Poverty is relevant, but we are talking about our equalities review.

Yes.

The committee is committed to a taking stock exercise on age.

Yes.

General poverty in terms of children in communities is an issue for the Communities Committee. Our role is to consider equalities.

So you are not interested in poverty.

I am not saying that.

Okay.

I am saying that this committee has a particular remit.

Okay, I will be resigning from your committee if you are not prepared to listen to the argument that I am making. I will resign—

I am reminding you that the remit of the committee—

I would like to move formally that poverty should in the future be an integral part of this committee's remit.

John, we did not agree this committee's remit. It is a—

We should alter this committee's remit if we are not happy—

John—listen to what I am saying. This is a standing committee of the Parliament. The remit of the committee was set out at the start of the Parliament. Another committee deals with poverty and community issues.

I am not disagreeing that poverty should be a priority for the whole Parliament, but this committee's role is to consider equalities. We need to stick to that. There are issues that—

How can you have equality when you have got poverty that you are condoning?

It can be argued that if you do not have equality you will always have poverty. But the remit of this committee is equalities. Yes?

Well, I was—

That remit was set out before you and I were—

I was going to say that poverty should be a key consideration in the development of this committee's legacy paper to be passed on to the next committee.

This is an excellent committee; it has been a pleasure working on it. But, at the same time, there are issues—

I am the reporter on age issues—what John Swinburne is saying is very important. When we consider the taking stock exercise on age—for elderly people and for young people—we will discover the truth of the figures that John has been bandying about. Many pensioners are living in poverty and this committee will have a report on that. Our remit is not poverty, but I can promise John that poverty will feature in the age report.

You are absolutely right, Sandra. That is how we work.

You will be doing it without my assistance. I have more things to do with my time. This morning we had an excellent conversation and discussion, but this committee is becoming a talking shop. We have to highlight the genuine problems in Scotland that Parliament can attack.

This morning we have been listening to evidence—

It was brilliant.

Let me remind you that we were discussing a barrier that disabled people in Scotland face. Disabled people are probably among the poorest people in Scotland.

Yes.

That is not only because they cannot access education and leisure services but because they cannot access work. If one cannot access work, one is poor. We are trying to change that. If you do not think that that is valuable work, I challenge your view.

By the same token, a disabled person in poverty's chances of rising above that to the level that we were discussing earlier are negligible. We should address that.

That is what we are trying to change. You went—

We will not be trying to change it unless we talk about it.

We have spent the past year trying to do some of this work. You are new to the committee. This committee has been up and down the country speaking to disabled people, including disabled young people—

The committee has been doing great work.

We do not want just to talk; we want to make recommendations that will lead to changes. I have told every participation group that we have attended that the inquiry is not just about talking. If people challenge what SAAS says because they cannot obtain the money to attend college or university, or if they challenge what colleges are doing because they are doing pretendy courses that will never give them the opportunity to earn money to improve their situation, we want to change that. We are doing what people have asked us to do. We will make recommendations that will challenge poverty.

I am not asking you to give up any strand of equality that the committee is pursuing; I am asking only that you to add another strand—the most important strand—which is the poverty that brings about and exacerbates many of the issues that have been discussed.

In a sense, I agree with you that inequalities bring about poverty. We are considering how to challenge inequality issues. We want an equalities review that will examine whether the Executive is doing what it should do and what is happening in Scotland. We will consider what the review can do to highlight inequalities. Inequalities occur across the board and they bring in poverty. However, poverty is not on the list of strands because the committee's role is to consider equalities. I would like to consider communities, but we are not the Communities Committee.

If we are not happy with the situation, surely we can challenge it and change it.

We need to deal with what we have.

We cannot place all responsibilities on one committee.

I remind John Swinburne that we agreed to undertake a comprehensive and in-depth study of disabilities following the European year of disabled people. We took the view that the inquiry should have a geographical spread and that we should speak to people from all age groups, achieve gender balance and so on. We wanted to examine issues that disabled people told us were important to them, which concerned accessing leisure, work and education. We are following up on their requests. We hope to have a body of evidence such that when we progress our review, it will be the most comprehensive review ever of services for disabled people. I am proud of that.

I compliment you on doing that; that is marvellous.

That is our job. What we are doing will of course cover poverty issues, but our inquiry concerns disabled people. The committee unanimously agreed on that and we must focus on that, which will show up poverty issues. We are saying that poverty is proving to be a barrier to learning and that it is one issue that we will raise with the Executive. However, we are not considering poverty on its own but how it fits into our inquiry.

Likewise, if the equalities review identifies discrimination that leads to poverty, that will be picked up. John—you and I have discussed equalities and you are bang on. It is not that you are not interested in equalities; I know that you are.

Do not get me wrong—the committee is doing great work and is to be complimented on it. No one can decry the outstanding work that it has done. I am asking only that the committee add another strand to the six strands of inequalities—not to discuss it now, but rather to leave it in our legacy document for the future.

Of the six equality strands that we cover, poverty runs through at least four, if not more.

Yes.

Yes—poverty is not a strand but a result.

Whether the issue is age or discrimination because of someone's disability or gender, poverty can be an integral consideration.

If this powerful committee highlighted problems with poverty in Scotland today, someone somewhere would be bound to sit up and take notice. We are skirting around the edges instead of going to the heart of the problem, which is that people are living in poverty. Children are in poverty. The Government talks about lifting children out of absolute poverty into relative poverty; that is appalling. Such a situation should not exist in modern-day Scotland. All that I am saying is that, as the Equal Opportunities Committee, we should highlight that.

We have discussed undertaking an equalities review of the Executive's work, which falls within our role. That review will pick up issues of poverty.

The committee's remit is to cover the six equalities strands and to scrutinise issues that relate to equalities. Our highlighting of inequalities will highlight where there is deprivation, discrimination and poverty.

So why not make poverty an additional strand so that there are seven strands?

It is not in our remit to—

Cannot we do so because Canon Kenyon Wright did not agree to do so prior to 1999? Come on.

The committee's equalities remit is included in Parliament's standing orders.

The only way of getting rid of poverty is through independence.

We will not to go into that.

John, I would not like to lose you from the committee because you have participated well in its work.

I am sorry, but if poverty is not concentrated on to the same extent as the other six strands are concentrated on, I am afraid that you will lose me and I will find another committee.

Perhaps you should consider the Communities Committee, but it is a shame to lose you.

Okay. Thank you.

I return to the equalities review, which we have discussed previously, as members will recall. Do members have any other comments to make on the proposals?

I am content with them, but I want to ask about the range of practices and policy developments that will be considered. Will we look at education, employment, wealth, public appointments and so on? Will the review be that big?

As I tried to explain to John Swinburne, the review will be wide and will cover all areas.

That is excellent. It will be important to highlight Professor Curtice's research on social attitudes.

The review will consider all the things that have been mentioned. It will provide an opportunity to consider equalities throughout Scotland. If we highlight relevant areas, that will be a considerable legacy.

Are members content for the proposal to be submitted to the Conveners Group, which will clearly need to discuss resources?

Members indicated agreement.