Chamber and committees

I understand your frustration. The enforcement lies with the EHRC. You are right to point out that there was an interim update but that guidance has not been issued. The EHRC is working at pace and I believe that it will issue its guidance towards the end of June. In the meantime, the Scottish Government is reviewing a wide range of areas—I think that Cat McMeeken specified all of them. That will enable us to be in a state of readiness so that, when the EHRC issues its guidance, we will be able to move forward at pace.

We are identifying the six priority groups that are at the highest risk: lone parents, minority ethnic families, families with disabled adults and children, families with young mothers who are under 25, families with children under one and larger families such as those with three children or more. We are focused on supporting those groups because we know that 90 per cent of all children in poverty live within those six priority family types. We are building our knowledge and understanding of the barriers to moving out of poverty that those families face.

Of course, there is also intersectionality across those groups. For instance, an ethnic minority family might have three or more children and one of those children might also be disabled.

Thank you for that. There is a wider point about women’s political representation as well. We want to be—well, we are—committed to achieving that fairer and more equal political representation so that everybody’s voices can be heard.

We recognise that we need to do better in representing the diversity across Scotland. We are doing other work alongside that. We are, of course, engaging with the EHRC on its forthcoming guidance. As I said in my earlier answer, we will be in a state of readiness for when we get that. In the meantime, it is the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice who is having that dialogue with the EHRC, and she welcomes working with it.

We are taking action to have more diverse representation in the Parliament and in local government. For instance, we have called on the UK Government to introduce gender quotas for elections across the UK, or for us to have the power to do that. We also fund organisations such as Elect Her, and I know that the member has appeared at promotion events that it has held. We provide funding to Engender to make sure that it progresses its equal representation project. We also provide funding to the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities to support the work of the cross-party barriers to elected office special interest group and the young women lead project.

A wide variety of work is going on to make sure that women are included and to maximise their participation in political life.

Thank you, Presiding Officer, and fellow members.

I am delighted to close the debate on global intergenerational week 2025, and I thank my colleague Jackie Dunbar for lodging the motion and my fellow MSPs for attending and taking part. It is important that we celebrate this global event organised by Generations Working Together, which is the nationally recognised centre of excellence supporting the development of intergenerational work across Scotland.

The seven themes explored in this year’s campaign are key to my work as Minister for Equalities and align with the mission and values of the Scottish Government. Indeed, the themes include challenging ageism and social isolation and loneliness, both of which come under my portfolio.

The Scottish Government recognises the value in bringing generations together to encourage greater understanding and respect between them and to build more cohesive and fairer communities in Scotland. As a result, we are working with a wide range of partners across the age equality spectrum, including Generations Working Together, which sits on both our older people’s strategic action forum and our social isolation and loneliness advisory group.

I have seen in practice the benefits to both older and younger generations of coming together to share skills and to learn from one another. In February, I had the pleasure of visiting the men’s shed in Inverclyde—a volunteer-run grass-roots organisation that provides community spaces where people can get involved and grow. In its workshop, I saw multiple generations and cultures working together and building friendships.

Turning to colleagues’ contributions, I was struck by Jackie Dunbar’s general belief that generations can learn from one another and her celebration of the tradition of oral history that passes on to other generations our folklore, storytelling and language—indeed, all languages, including the Doric, for which Jackie Dunbar has a great passion.

I thank Alexander Stewart for recognising the progress that we have made. I accept that we face challenges, but I give him an absolute commitment that we will continue to make further progress.

Inspired by Christine Grahame, as so many of us are, Emma Harper highlighted the value of education as a way of addressing ageism. When I was a teacher, which was not that long ago, I took great pleasure—especially when I was teaching primary 7s—in making sure that, as part of our work on the topic of people and place, we reached out to local older people. We organised tea parties for them in the school, and children were able to develop their social and interpersonal skills by learning how to take turns to ask questions and listen. Everyone benefited from that.

Paul Sweeney acknowledged the opportunities that intergenerational work presents and emphasised—very poignantly, I must say—the vast knowledge that is held by our older people and for which we are grateful to them.

Christine Grahame highlighted the role of grandparents. I am sure that all members are grateful to her for sharing the joyful tales of the activities that she has taken part in, including face painting. I am sure that she looked perfect.

I return to the fact that the Scottish Government is clear about our support for intergenerational working, with older people in particular, given the impact that it has on loneliness. That is evident from the support that we provide through the social isolation and loneliness fund, which supports 53 organisations in tackling social isolation and loneliness. We will be investing £3.8 million in that work over a three-year period.

As Alexander Stewart pointed out, social isolation and loneliness are public health issues that can affect anyone at any stage of life. Therefore, many of the projects that are funded take a strong intergenerational approach by supporting older and younger people to connect through social lunches, befriending, community meals or other activities.

We are, of course, proud to have supported men’s sheds since their inception in Scotland more than a decade ago, and we have provided more than three quarters of a million pounds to enable that movement to grow and flourish. Men’s sheds are a positive role model for fostering connections between generations of men to increase wellbeing, reduce stigma and make a difference to their local communities.

We are also delighted to fund Befriending Networks, which provides vital support and advice to befriending organisations across the UK and is a partner of our social isolation and loneliness advisory group. We do recognise that many of those organisations rely on the passion of volunteers.

We know that intergenerational volunteering brings many benefits, not only by reducing loneliness and isolation but by helping people make new friends, have fun and help others. Building a deeper understanding of one another through volunteering can help all generations feel valued as well as create a greater sense of belonging and help everyone improve their mental health and build their confidence. That is why the Scottish Government has published the volunteering action plan, which seeks to increase participation and reduce barriers to volunteering for all.

I again thank Ms Dunbar for securing the debate and Generations Working Together for its tireless work in raising the profile of intergenerational work across the globe. I appreciate that we have faced many challenges that have impacted on intergenerational connections, such as Covid-19 and the on-going cost of living crisis, but I know that, with the on-going support of Generations Working Together as a key partner, we can strive to make a positive difference to all generations.

I thank Maggie Chapman for bringing the motion to the chamber. She started with very powerful testimonial words from those with direct experience, and I thank her for bringing their voices to the heart of the chamber tonight.

She noted the recent publication of the legal briefing, “Ending Destitution in Scotland—A Road Map for Policymakers”, as do I. I welcome the breadth of the report and many of its recommendations. It is absolutely right that we continue to challenge ourselves to ensure that we are doing everything that we can to reduce destitution in Scotland. The fair way Scotland partnership has sent me a copy of the briefing, and I will respond to it in full very shortly.

Far from failing to act, in 2021, the Scottish Government published our pioneering ending destitution together strategy in partnership with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities. Many colleagues have referred to that tonight. It is the first of its kind in the UK and it sets out our inclusive approach to improving and strengthening support provision and service access for people who are subject to NRPF in Scotland.

Our powers are limited, however, and nationality and immigration, including the policy of no recourse to public funds, are wholly reserved to the UK Parliament. As much as we would like to, we are unable to end destitution for all overnight. We can, however, continue to deliver services, work in partnership with organisations across Scotland and continue to legislate if we have the power to do so or to raise issues with the UK Government if we do not have that power. We do that to ensure the implementation of our vision that no one in Scotland is forced into destitution and that everyone has their human rights protected, regardless of their immigration status.

I will say a wee bit about financial support. Since 2021, we have invested more than £500,000 each year to support the most destitute in Scotland. Between 2021 and 2024, funding was provided to the British Red Cross to deliver the Scottish crisis fund. That pilot project provided people with emergency crisis cash support and was inclusive of people who had no recourse to public funds. Learning from the project showed that some people who accessed the fund could access other public funds but needed casework support to exercise their rights and access appropriate services.

Building on that learning, since June 2024, we have been working with fair way Scotland on the delivery of a project that provides cash support and casework for those who are most in need. That holistic support package is assisting people to exercise their right to public funds, including in housing, emergency cash to tackle food insecurity and the ability to access culturally appropriate foods and essential needs. Since July 2024, more than 400 people have been supported out of destitution.

For some time, we have been lobbying the UK Government to remove the Scottish welfare fund from the restricted public funds list. If people who are subject to NRPF in Scotland were able to access that emergency crisis cash support, that would provide an additional safety net to mitigate destitution. We will continue to call for that, and for all schemes that are created using devolved powers to have the ability to determine their own eligibility requirements.

I understand why Maggie Chapman asks for that, but I refer her to paragraph 6.2 of the UK immigration rules, which includes the words

“a payment made from a welfare fund under the Welfare Funds (Scotland) Act 2015”.

That is why people who are subject to NRPF cannot access the Scottish welfare fund and why we cannot create a new support fund under that act while it remains on the public funds list that is defined by the UK Government. However, I reassure the member that, as I have said, we continue—I continue—to robustly lobby the UK Government to act in those areas.

I will go on to our next steps. As the report highlights, more can be done. We have been working closely with COSLA, stakeholders, third sector organisations and local authorities to review the delivery of the ending destitution together strategy and develop a work plan for phase 2 of delivery. The vision and principles of the strategy are as relevant today as the day that they were published. However, the feedback has been that an understanding of the NRPF condition and eligibility is not always clear for front-line workers. Carol Mochan and other members made that point about opaqueness.

As a priority, prior to the publication of the strategy, we developed migrants’ rights and entitlements guidance, in partnership with COSLA. We have updated that guidance and provided training. That guidance aims to support local authorities when making support decisions, and we want to ensure that it remains up to date and accessible for people. We will also work with Public Health Scotland, general practitioner networks and other front-line workers to improve understanding and awareness of NRPF and people’s eligibilities and to better support them.

I thank Mr Sweeney for raising that point, which I will consider.

I will try my best to respond to a few of the points that were raised during the debate—there were far too many to mention, which shows the interest in the debate. I was glad to hear Tim Eagle talk about treating people with dignity, but I wonder how he feels about the hostile environment that was created under the previous Government. That somewhat undermines his statement. Evelyn Tweed, Marie McNair and other colleagues pointed out that hostile environments do not achieve the aim that they are intended to achieve.

Richard Leonard made a compelling case for support, and he also challenged the Labour Government in Westminster, which could act in areas of reserved competence. I assure him that I am doing everything that I can, and it is good to see that there is cross-party support on that.

Emma Roddick highlighted the limitations that are placed on the Scottish Parliament, and I refer again to the 2015 legislation.

To conclude, I welcome the debate and I have listened very carefully. I thank Jen Ang for publishing the report and Maggie Chapman for securing the debate.

I will have a go at answering it and I will try to unpick some of the elements. Yes, the police were recognised as being institutionally racist. There is a clear distinction, however: that does not mean to say that the people working in the police force are all racist. We know how institutions and structures can reinforce and compound discriminatory practices.

Once we have that acknowledgement, my pragmatic piece is to move on. Our focus is on improving outcomes; that is what we need to do. The police take a community-first approach and they invest in community police officers to build those relationships within the communities and to be embedded within them. I know that they do amazing work in community centres, on the street, in our schools and so on. However, it is incumbent on us all to reach out and build that mutual trust and confidence, although I understand that there will be challenges when people are operating in a deficit model.

Nick Bland mentioned our work on new Scots, and we are also doing a lot of work around hate crime. The police play a crucial role in making Scotland a safe and cohesive place. I refer again to the events of the summer, when the police were involved in extensive briefings and their response was largely well received by the communities. I think that, by and large, they struck that balance between providing a supportive presence and not being oppressive or taking a disproportionate approach. Of course, we have to remember that the police are completely independent, and what they do in that regard is up to them, in that sense.

Nick, do you want to come in briefly?

I cannot comment on anything specific, as the member will be well aware. However, I point out that there are also the regulations on health and safety in the workplace. There are lots of regulations in place.

This is certainly a role for the EHRC, which is the enforcer, as it were, with jurisdiction over this area. I will be meeting the commission very soon, possibly even next week. We have always had a close working relationship, and I am looking forward to meeting it to explore these issues of interpretation and enforcement. I am sure that those issues will come up.

I am sure that the health portfolio can provide further information about hospitals in particular, but my general understanding is that the estate is moving towards single-sex provision. It is a big estate that is moving away from mixed wards towards the provision of single-sex wards. Particularly as new hospitals are built, certain buildings are moving towards the provision of single rooms in order to ensure that patients’ dignity is intact.