Chamber and committees

I will bring Nick Bland in to comment on that.

I have thought about that very carefully. It is one of the reasons why we partnered with the STV children’s appeal to distribute the funding, because that organisation already has well-established links and it supports a wide range of organisations. Often, they are very small projects that are based in local community centres. They may hold drop-in coffee mornings or offer sports opportunities. They may offer knit and natter meetings, dancing workshops or arts and crafts. They do all sorts of things. That is not an exhaustive description, but it gives you a flavour of what some of those local groups do. Some are run by two or three people, while other organisations are bigger.

For the organisations that provide those spaces, a little extra money goes a long way. It may pay for bookings in community centres, it may pay for the teas and coffees, or it may pay for staff training so that people can have constructive conversations about issues that are causing tensions within communities. That means that people can discuss those concerns in a constructive manner with people who can support them through that, using a trauma-informed approach. The safe spaces already exist, so this is about enhancing funding for them.

12:00

I am very cognisant that brilliant work is already happening. However, because of the additional challenges that we are facing in fostering good relations in the community cohesion space, the extra funding was required in order to enhance those opportunities and provide more. We are talking about bringing people together so that they can speak to one another and communicate. We know that, the more people get to know one other, the more we dispel the myths and break down the barriers. We can deal with misinformation and disinformation and get into the heart of the communities where people are having those conversations.

I am going to stick with the protocol of the Scottish Government; I am not going to make any comment on any proceedings that are in court.

The fund that you are referring to supports 47 organisations. It is important to emphasise that. We have previously engaged with LGBT Youth Scotland to determine the facts around various media reports. What you are referring to now and what you are presenting to me I have no way of fact checking in live time. It is an organisation that has been in the spotlight and it gets a lot of attention. I have visited the organisation, I have spoken to the users of that organisation, and I have seen first hand the good work that it is doing in supporting young people in various ways. As a constituency MSP, I have also had communications from parents who have been grateful for the work that the organisation has done in increasing awareness, supporting parents, and supporting youngsters. There is a wide variety of work that is going on there.

I have been assured that LGBT Youth Scotland has strengthened its safeguarding policies to ensure that they are in line with legislation and that they meet the national standards. It continues to review those policies annually to make sure that they are as comprehensive as possible.

My answer to that is that I am very much in line with the EHRC on this. We know that robust, good-quality data is important. We know that because we shape our services around that data. We can forward plan based on it and allocate funding. There are lots of good reasons for having that data so absolutely, we need to do that.

We also need to remember that, for the data that we collect, there have to be good reasons for doing so, because people have to offer that data. Nobody could force any one of us in this room to declare anything about ourselves that we do not wish to. When I have filled in the additional forms that go along with recruitment processes, for instance, I know that, on occasion, I possibly have not filled in the bit about which ethnic minority you belong to. We need to make sure that people are engaged in relation to giving their data and know and have confidence that their data will be used appropriately and proportionately for the purpose for which it is collected. That is what I am saying on that just now. I do not know if there is anything else that officials would like to add.

I get what you are saying. We have policing by consent, and I am very pleased that we take that approach through community police officers. As an MSP, in representing Glasgow city centre and Kelvin, I have extensive contact with local police representatives, so I have the opportunity to raise the concerns of my constituents, who sometimes raise the concerns that you have raised. The police are covered by the public sector equality duty, so they must fulfil their duties by having due regard for such issues. Police Scotland is, of course, totally independent.

I will bring in Nick Bland.

Yes. Our intention is always to continue engagement as widely as possible.

It is well known that I concern myself with outcomes. Processes should help to achieve outcomes. They should not be hindering them or be overly cumbersome or difficult to navigate.

We are absolutely committed to advancing equality, and the PSED is an example of the important levers that we have available to us. We are leading by example to inspire other public bodies to put equality front and centre. However, we need to remember that it is ultimately for public bodies that are independent of Government to set out what they intend to achieve and how they will do that. I take a leadership role in that regard and, as you know, I take it very seriously, I have communicated that to a wide range of audiences and groups, both in person and in correspondence.

In engaging with the PSED, we also have to be mindful of the limits on legislative competence in such frameworks. Vuyi Stutley has gone over some of that detail and I will not repeat it, but we need to remember that, because it is a “due regard” duty, it is by its nature a procedural duty. That means that it is not outcomes focused in its form, but I am clear that the policy intention behind the PSED is substantive.

The Equality Act 2010, in which the duty sits, was intended to be transformative when it was introduced. It is a wide-ranging and on-going duty to engage in conscious consideration of the three needs, and we see that as a strength. If it required a narrower focus on identifying or achieving particular outcomes, we would see that as a limitation. It needs to be seen in the wider sense. I can go into further detail on that if you wish.

Nick Bland would like to add to what I have said.

I cannot speak on behalf of other public bodies. You would have to ask them.

Indeed.