When our communities are telling us that they feel threatened and are under pressure, we all have a responsibility to listen, to build trust and to reduce tensions. That can help to ensure that misinformation spreads less easily. As part of that, we all need to be mindful of the information that we are sharing and the language that we use.

The Scottish Government is deeply concerned about some of the rhetoric that we are hearing across the United Kingdom, which should have no place in our society. Refugees and people seeking asylum must not be scapegoated for current complex challenges. In September, I set out our approach as part of my “One Scotland, Many Voices” statement to the Parliament. That approach includes an additional £300,000 to support grass-roots projects that are uniting people from different backgrounds, cultures and faiths.

Kaukab Stewart has identified an error in her contribution and provided the following correction.

At col 33, para 5, line 1—

Original text—

I condemn any behaviour that raises tensions and creates division in our societies—there is no place at all for that. It is perfectly possible to have the right to free speech, but we need to be mindful that there is clear hate crime legislation.

There are strands in the equally safe strategy that directly address work on the radicalisation of people, particularly young people and young men.

Corrected text—

I condemn any behaviour that raises tensions and creates division in our societies—there is no place at all for that. It is perfectly possible to have the right to free speech, but we need to be mindful that there is clear hate crime legislation.

Our work to tackle radicalisation is also supported by wider strategies such as equally safe which can intersect with radicalisation among some young men.

I condemn any behaviour that raises tensions and creates division in our societies—there is no place at all for that. It is perfectly possible to have the right to free speech, but we need to be mindful that there is clear hate crime legislation. There are strands in the equally safe strategy that directly address work on the radicalisation of people, particularly young people and young men. [Kaukab Stewart has corrected this contribution. See end of report.]

I thank all members for their thoughtful contributions. I pay tribute to Pam Duncan-Glancy for lodging this important motion, which shows our shared commitment to equality and inclusion. I will try to refer to as many points as possible, but, as usual, there has been a wide variety of comments. If there is anything that I do not mention, I am quite happy for people to follow that up with me.

I will also take a moment to acknowledge the loss of two remarkable individuals. Etienne D’Abolville has been mentioned and remembered by Pam Duncan-Glancy, and I would also like to pay tribute to Alan Dick. Both were powerful and dedicated advocates for independent living and tireless champions of disabled people’s rights. We honour their legacy and, of course, I extend our condolences to all who knew and loved them. They give us a reason to keep going. They fought, and I see that Pam Duncan-Glancy is carrying on that fight.

Pam Duncan-Glancy spoke of her accomplishment in being the first permanent wheelchair user to be elected to the Scottish Parliament, and I know that she will make sure that she is not the last. From a personal point of view, speaking as the first woman of colour to be elected to the Parliament, I can say the same. We are not the ones who will pull up the ladder behind us—in fact, I would say that we would both get rid of the need for that ladder in the first place.

In the meantime, I will highlight the access to elected office fund, which opened again on 6 May. Having originally started as a pilot in 2017, it provides practical and financial support and is now on a statutory footing, following the Scottish Elections (Representation and Reform) Act 2025. Of course, it goes without saying that the fund does not help with any political messaging; it just provides practical support. So far, the fund has helped more than 100 disabled candidates who have stood for election.

Comments were made on fair work, and our ambition is to at least halve the disability employment gap by 2038. The estimated disability employment rate gap has decreased, from 37.4 per cent between January and December 2016 to 31.5 per cent between January and December 2024, according to Office for National Statistics records. Clearly, that figure is still too high, and there are challenges there that we will address, but we are making progress in that area.

Accessible transport was also mentioned. The vision is that disabled people will be able to travel with the same freedom, choice, dignity and opportunity as other citizens. Launched in 2016, the 10-year accessible travel framework was co-produced with disabled people. The 2024 to 2026 delivery plan covers delivery for the final two years of that framework, and work on that is progressing. There are regular consultations with representatives from disabled people’s organisations, to hear about what more can be done.

I was very pleased to launch the pilot to provide concessionary travel on public transport for companions of those who are blind and visually impaired. That was a further achievement.

Since, in 1992, the UN designated 3 December, which is tomorrow, as international day of persons with disabilities, the aim has been clear—to champion the rights of disabled people and to ensure their full participation in every aspect of life. However, we know that barriers remain in education, employment, transport and public services, leaving too many at risk of poverty and exclusion.

I hear the points that were made by Jeremy Balfour. Although I understand and share his concerns about not moving fast enough, I do not completely agree with the narrative that he painted. I engage fully with disabled people’s organisations, and I launched the improving access fund, with a significant contribution of £1.5 million. That was very warmly welcomed by disabled people’s organisations, because it provides practical help that will assist people in their daily lives.

This year’s theme—fostering disability-inclusive societies for advancing social progress—means that equality is not optional. We know that it is essential to tackling poverty and building a fairer Scotland. Participation is the foundation of progress. We want to make sure that the disability equality plan, which was co-designed, has a focus on three priorities: strengthening financial security, bolstering inclusive participation, and improving mental health and wellbeing.

I am mindful of the time, so I will finish by saying that we are also embedding disability competence across Government, so that policies are not only designed for disabled people but shaped with them, making inclusion a starting point.

A fairer Scotland is possible only when equal rights are secured for everyone. That requires more than this debate; it requires more than good intentions—I know that. It also demands action, determination and a shared responsibility. Together, we will continue to dismantle the barriers and build a Scotland where equality is lived and not just imagined.

I am happy to meet any members who are interested in pursuing the issue at their convenience.

Female genital mutilation—FGM—is an abhorrent practice and it has been illegal in Scotland since 1985. The figure stated in The Herald does not represent the number of women who have been subjected to FGM in Glasgow; it reflects the number of women with FGM who have received treatment in the area.

Such figures show that FGM remains a concerning reality for many women and girls in Scotland. I am glad that medical professionals recognised the symptoms or that the women have had the confidence to come forward and seek the medical attention that they need. We continue to work closely with stakeholders to implement the Female Genital Mutilation (Protection and Guidance) (Scotland) Act 2020. That will strengthen the existing legislative framework to offer extra protection to women and girls who are at risk of FGM.

I thank Annie Wells for that important question and for giving me the opportunity to reiterate my concern and agreement that we are talking about women and girls, not statistics.

I stress that the Government is resolute in its commitment to implementing the 2020 act. Successful implementation requires co-ordinated action from multiple stakeholders, including local authorities, health boards, justice agencies and specialist services. Those organisations need time to develop processes, train their staff and ensure that the resources are in place to meet their statutory duties. We are working closely with those partners to provide guidance and support, so that implementation is effective and sustainable.

Although I want the act to be implemented as soon as possible, we have to implement it in a way that is sustainable and that ensures that it can deliver protections for women and girls without placing unmanageable pressure on those who are responsible for delivering those protections.

I join my colleagues on the Government benches in stressing that the Government is resolute in its commitment to implementing the 2020 act. As I said, it requires a co-ordinated approach, and we are on track with the timeline that we set earlier this year. The first draft of the statutory guidance has been completed, civil court rule proposals have been submitted to the Scottish Civil Justice Council and we continue to work with stakeholders on all aspects of the implementation. I want to make sure that we can deliver the protections to women and girls that members have mentioned, and in the way that was intended, but without placing unmanageable pressure on those who are responsible.

Today’s debate has been an important opportunity to discuss one of the most serious issues in society: violence against women in all its forms. I agree that the debate has been largely consensual. It has been significant in allowing us to reflect on the evolving nature of such abuse as a result of digital tools. From coercive control via devices to online stalking, cases of technology-facilitated sexual harassment and abuse are on the rise. It is important that we prevent and tackle the use of those new tools and approaches, so I echo the cabinet secretary’s call for tech platforms to act to address violence against women and girls.

Only together can we make progress. The theme of the campaign that we have been talking about is unite. That means that everyone, including Governments, local authorities, stakeholders and individuals—women, girls, men and boys—needs to unite, because only by coming together can we deliver a safe online environment that women and girls can use and enjoy positively, without fear of and threat from others.

I will offer some reflections of my own, and then I will try to pick up as many of the points that have been raised as possible, although there have been far too many for me to name individuals.

When reflecting on online harms, I cannot reiterate enough that collective action is required. That brings to mind discussions that took place in the Parliament a year ago. Back then, we focused on how to empower young people’s voices. I am also reminded that technology-facilitated violence against women and girls was one of the issues that was raised in the Scottish Youth Parliament debate a year ago. It is imperative that young people, to whom the use of technology is second nature, inform the actions that we need to take to make technology safer. It is vital that young people shape our approach, which is why we are co-creating with young people the public awareness campaign that the cabinet secretary mentioned.

I remain thoughtful of the representation of the Scottish Youth Parliament on the joint strategic board that helps with the delivery of our equally safe strategy, which is chaired jointly by the Scottish Government and COSLA. The voices of that Parliament remain essential to ensuring that our collective efforts reflect the needs and aspirations of young people.

It is equally vital that we understand that online abuse is connected to other forms of violence against women. The victim or survivor who experiences technology-facilitated coercive control, sexual harassment or stalking will also experience those things in the physical world. We move between digital and physical spaces seamlessly, and harm that is committed online is felt in the real world, so it is important that we do not invent some artificial divide between the two.

I am afraid that I do not have those figures to hand, but I will take the opportunity to reiterate that the article in The Herald misleadingly suggests that 1,200 women were subjected to FGM in Glasgow. That figure represents those who received treatment for FGM in NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde between 2019 and June 2025. FGM is illegal in this country, so it is highly possible that the procedure was performed overseas.