Skip to main content
Loading…
Chamber and committees

Equal Opportunities Committee, 30 Apr 2002

Meeting date: Tuesday, April 30, 2002


Contents


Reporters

Item four is committee reporters. Everyone should have received a paper from the sexual orientation reporter. Cathy, do you want to speak to the paper?

Cathy Peattie:

The paper is clear on the issues that were discussed. I am happy to answer any questions. I bring the committee's attention to the Holocaust memorial event. Members will recall that we recently discussed the issue with regard to Gypsy Travellers. In the same vein, there is a feeling that the LGBT network should be represented at the event. I would like the convener to write to Jim Wallace to ask whether we can expect LGBT representatives to be present at the next Holocaust memorial event?

The subject of the paper was our first meeting—we tried for some time to arrange one. We hope to have a regular meeting every six weeks. I will be happy to produce a report for the committee on those meetings.

Are there any questions?

I do not understand paragraph six of the report, which begins:

"Sex between a man and a woman in a public place if someone else was present would normally be treated as a breach of the peace."

Does that mean if they get caught?

Obviously, they would have to be caught for it to be treated as anything.

Cathy Peattie:

My understanding is that the issue is to do with the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Bill, because same-sex partners who had sex in a public place would be treated differently from a different-sex couple. It has been said that the offence is a victimless offence. The point is that same-sex couples would be treated differently from a man and a woman.

That applies to male same-sex couples, and not female same-sex couples.

I just thought that having sex in a public place was an offence for everybody.

The Convener:

The point is that if the couple is a man and a woman, the offence is treated as a breach of the peace, which is a minor offence. It is treated as a more serious offence with far harsher sentences if two men are involved. The element of discrimination is the problem, rather than whether people condone having sex in public.

Are there any other questions or comments? If not, I inform the committee that I am still waiting for a response from Jim Wallace on the Holocaust memorial event. It would be worth waiting for that response. We e-mailed the person who made the inquiry about Holocaust memorial day to let them know what is happening. When we receive the response, I will bring it to the committee, and depending on the response we can make further approaches to the Minister for Justice. Is that agreed, and are the recommendations in the paper agreed?

Members indicated agreement.

Mr McMahon:

I have a brief report. I followed up previous work with a more formal meeting with Black and Ethnic Minority Infrastructure in Scotland. On 18 April, Richard Walsh and I met Rami Ousta, who heads BEMIS. He outlined some of the problems that he will face in the short and long term. He stated that as well as developing the infrastructure for black and minority ethnic groups, BEMIS intends to develop a partnership approach with civic Scotland and the Scottish Parliament. Could we involve ourselves in that, and ensure that BEMIS representatives get the opportunity to come to the committee, so that we can have a dialogue with them on where they are coming from and the issues that they are dealing with?

The Convener:

I am sure that no committee members would object to that. When we are discussing the work plan later we can fit that in. Do any other reporters have anything to report? If not, before we move into private session I thank the British Sign Language interpreter and the palantypist, who have now left, for the assistance that they have given to the committee.

Meeting continued in private until 12:24.