Equal Opportunities Committee, 24 Oct 2000

Meeting date: Tuesday, October 24, 2000

Official Report 99KB pdf

---

Reporters

Irene McGugan has a report. Members have paper EO/00/20/4.

The disability report relates to our earlier agenda item on training, which I discussed with the representative from IDEAL Training. We also considered funding and translation. We have made recommendations, which we ask the committee to endorse.

The first recommendation is simple but has far-reaching implications. It is difficult for people who are visually impaired and cannot read our name-plates to know who is talking unless the convener says the name in full. That makes the process sound formal, but it helps people who cannot read the name-plates to identify who is speaking. The practice is incorporated in the standing orders and we hope that our recommendation will go forward to the conveners group so that all committees adhere to it.

Members have today received a memorandum from Rosemary Everett in response to our queries about translation. Good progress is being made on translating all the Parliament's public information material into various formats. Public information staff are to be congratulated on doing that and on the time scales within which they are working.

We asked that, where possible, committee papers also be made available to members of the public with visual or other impairments. We recognise that the tight time scales and the great amount of information that goes to committees might cause problems, but we ask the Presiding Officer and the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body to consider whether progress can be made. It would reassure organisations, such as IDEAL Training, that represent disability groups that the Parliament was doing all that it could do to make its information widely available. We should keep under review the current translation services and the services that are proposed for the new building at Holyrood, where there could be some changes.

I draw members' attention to the fact that tomorrow the Transport and the Environment Committee is considering the Transport (Scotland) Bill. Bruce Crawford has lodged several amendments on the transport needs of disabled people. I will not be able to attend that meeting as I have another committee commitment, but I hope that members will encourage their colleagues on that committee to support the amendments and to ensure that the needs of disabled people and ethnic minorities are properly represented in the Transport (Scotland) Bill.

Thank you. Are those amendments in the business bulletin today?

Yes.

Irene McGugan is right to raise the issue that is covered by rule 7.2 of the standing orders. Although that rule might cause slight inconvenience, it is good that this committee should remind everyone that we have a responsibility to ensure that we are accessible to everyone.

I am glad that Irene McGugan mentioned the Holyrood project. May I ask Irene, as she is reporter on disability to this committee, whether liaison is taking place? I have raised this issue before. It is important that we ensure that the new building is accessible, not only in terms of physical accessibility, but in relation to people with hearing impairment, people who are blind or partially sighted and so on. We must continue to consider access to child care in the new Parliament building—both crèche and nursery facilities. We must keep those matters on the agenda.

I support Irene McGugan's suggestion that we contact the Presiding Officer about having committee papers produced in formats such as Braille, audio tape and computer disk.

I will raise those recommendations with the conveners group. I will try to remember to follow standing orders by saying people's names in full. That issue has been raised with me before. I tend to forget to do so because the committee meetings are informal. I will also raise with the chair of the SPCB what has been said about translation and committee papers.

On Holyrood, do members feel that it would be useful if I arranged a meeting with the steering group and the project team to discuss equal opportunities issues and disability and gender issues? I will not invite them along to a committee meeting because we tend to have a full timetable of evidence taking. I will liaise with members about a suitable time and organise an informal meeting with the project team.

That is important. However, I do not think that we should discount having them along at some point if necessary.

Absolutely, but raising these issues at an early stage in the project is important.

I agree. It is important to start at an early stage because it is difficult to know how we can make our views known and have an input in decision making. That process has not yet been made clear, so it would be useful if we were to make contact with the steering group in order to alert it to the fact that we have an interest in these matters.

Thank you, Irene. Elaine Smith also has a report.

I had a meeting with Malcolm Chisholm on 3 October, just before the recess. I am grateful to Alison Campbell for coming along to clerk that meeting. Malcolm and I discussed how to progress the programme of work on gender issues while Johann Lamont is seconded to the Education, Culture and Sport Committee. Before I move on to our recommendations, I will make a couple of points about the paper that members have before them. I note that one of the papers on agenda item 8, which is on the future work programme, mentions the proposed housing bill; I would prefer to leave that issue until we come to that agenda item.

We felt that, if possible, it would be important to hear Dr Sheila Henderson's views on the Transport (Scotland) Bill. To that end, Alison Campbell is trying to arrange a meeting with Dr Henderson next Tuesday. I hope that that meeting will take place.

It is important that the committee writes to the Deputy Minister for Communities, Jackie Baillie, in order to indicate our support for Engender's request that the Executive take on the production of an annual gender audit. The Fife Women's Technology Centre sent me a letter asking for that support; having discussed the letter, we decided to make that recommendation to the committee. The annual gender audit is extremely important. It is vital that the statistics are, and continue to be, produced properly.

The consultation document on the cross-examination of witnesses will be published in the near future, and it is important that the committee keeps an eye on that. I suggest in the paper that, as the reporter, I should examine the consultation document and report back to the committee so that we can decide whether we want to comment further on the consultation.

Thank you, Elaine. Do members have any questions or comments on Elaine's report?

Have we spoken to Margaret Curran about taking evidence on the proposed housing bill? Has progress been made on that issue?

Yes. We have reached agreement about the equal opportunities areas on which this committee will take evidence and on which the Social Inclusion, Housing and Voluntary Sector Committee will take evidence. We will discuss that issue in private, when we discuss our future work programme.

Do members agree to the two recommendations that are made in Elaine Smith's paper? I will write to Jackie Baillie and we should also clarify exactly when we should take evidence on the cross-examination of witnesses, as I am not sure when that consultation document will be published.

My proposal is that I will report on the consultation document when it is published. Then the committee can decide whether it is necessary to take evidence and whether we could fit that into our timetable. However, it is clear that we should await the publication of the consultation document.

Do you know when the document is likely to be published?

No. The only information that I have is that it is due to be published in the near future. I will keep on top of that to find out the exact date.

We will try to clarify that point.

Nora Radcliffe is not here, but we have a written report from the sexual orientation group. I cannot answer questions about the report, but do members have any comments? [Interruption.] Nora has just arrived—we will give her a couple of minutes.

Sorry, Nora, but we are just going through the report. Sorry to spring it on you when you have just arrived, but we have dealt with the other two reports.

I will take any questions that members might have.

Can I comment on item 7? I wanted to comment on item 3, on mainstreaming, but experienced the usual delays at Heathrow this morning. I do not know what has been decided about this paper, so I may be out of order in talking about it.

We are still dealing with reporters' reports.

But item 7 is mainstreaming equality, which I think that you have already dealt with. I am taking this opportunity to revisit it.

Under reporters' reports?

Item 7 on Nora Radcliffe's report is on mainstreaming equality.

Okay. I will be indulgent this time.

It is important that we take the initiative on mainstreaming equality. We should try to hold some meetings at which we educate all MSPs on the issues surrounding mainstreaming. I do not know what has been decided about this paper, but I know that lots of research has been done. The priority is to disseminate what is well known, and the Equal Opportunities Committee should ensure that the experts are given an opportunity to do that in the Parliament. We should get on with it rather than pretend that we do not know the answers.

We have agreed to pursue a bid for research funds to examine the ways in which progress can be made on mainstreaming in the Scottish Parliament.

We do not need research to do that, as there are experts who could tell people what they should be getting on with. That is what you have decided, and what I am suggesting does not contradict that. We cannot hang around for another few months while people decide what they are going to do. A lot of people have expertise that they could disseminate to MSPs if they were given the platform and the opportunity to do so. We should facilitate that by holding seminars for MSPs.

Research has been undertaken by Fiona McKay, for example, on mainstreaming in other European countries. That research could be disseminated and its conclusions conveyed to MSPs. It is important that we get on with that with a sense of urgency, rather than pretend that we do not know what to do. People out there know what to do; we need to ensure that their information and expertise is disseminated to MSPs.

Along with the other recommendations, that suggestion can be included in our interim checklist, about which a report will be produced for the committee on 7 November.

I would like some clarification from Nora Radcliffe on item 10 in the report, under which she recommends that the committee contact the Minister for Justice. Are we talking about two separate issues—same-sex marriages and parity between married and cohabiting couples under the law?

There are two separate issues, to be treated differently. The registration of same-sex partnerships, or same-sex marriages, is an issue for discussion. Parity between same-gender couples who are cohabiting and opposite-gender couples who are cohabiting ought to be assured now—that is the difference. Cohabiting couples who are in a stable relationship but not married should be treated equally, whether they are same-gender couples or opposite-gender couples.

My concern is that the two issues are contained in the same sentence, which could lead to confusion. We have had this debate before. The view of a number of equality organisations is that the priority is parity under the law and the practicalities of that. I worry that that issue could be lost in the presentation of the issue of same-sex marriages. We need to be cautious and ensure that we separate the two issues.

Thank you for raising that concern. We must put on record exactly what we mean.

There is a precedent in the amendment that was lodged to the Adults with Incapacity (Scotland) Bill, in which the committee required the same treatment in law for cohabiting different-sex and same-sex couples. The Executive accepted the amendment and I hope that future bills will ensure such parity.

The registration of same-sex relationships is in some ways a separate issue, and I am not sure that all the equality organisations speak with one voice on it. I understand that they will discuss the issue over the coming months; we will be able to react to that discussion at a more appropriate time. It is important to place on record the fact that we are dealing with two separate issues.

They are entirely separate issues, which are at different stages of acceptance.

I suspect that there will be quite a bit of interest when the committee discusses same-sex marriages.

As there are no further questions or comments on that report, that concludes our discussion of reporters' reports. We now move into private session for items 7 and 8 on the agenda.

Meeting continued in private until 10:50.