Thank you, cabinet secretary, but, in the previous evidence session this morning, we heard a huge concern about the gap between narrative and practice. With something as clearly beneficial as breastfeeding, if even the most basic provision is not being followed through with defined minimum core criteria, do you have a concern that there needs to be a tighter follow-through to ensure that there is accountability for that?

On 6 May, you and your official, Cat McMeeken, gave evidence to this committee. Your official responded to my questions regarding funding for third sector organisations that are supported by the equality and human rights fund. Ms McMeeken stated that the Scottish Government does not

“provide core funding, which is for the wider lobbying activities that organisations do. It is much more about giving funding for specific services.”—[Official Report, Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee, 6 May 2025; c 20.]

That is also what you have just said, minister. Why, then, did the fund manager, Inspiring Scotland, specifically include a list of the advocacy work that is carried out by the Equality Network, LEAP Sports Scotland, LGBT Youth Scotland, the LGBT Healthy Living Centre and Stonewall on gender identity services in a recent progress report on the equality and human rights fund? That is a specific question, minister. If you do not know the answer, I am happy to follow up with you separately.

That is an answer to a different question from the one that I asked.

In the interests of time, convener, I will pass back to you.

Thank you. This evidence session is about accountability. You used the terms “should be”, “obliged”, “must” and “minimum protections”. Yet, the Scottish Human Rights Commission has been operating for 17 years without any legal enforcement powers, and its remit is still based on the legislation that created it, the Scottish Commission for Human Rights Act 2006. Scottish National Party ministers, including yourself, have recently shelved the human rights bill that could have at least given the SHRC some teeth, which it needs because it cannot otherwise enforce. How can the SNP Government claim that it is committed to human rights when it has not delivered the legislation to improve scrutiny of its human rights record?

My question is a supplementary on the equality and fairer Scotland budget statement. There is a published analysis by protected characteristic. The minister talked about the importance of looking at data by protected characteristic.

Let me take breastfeeding as an example of a minimum core standard. Breastfeeding inequalities, relating to the protected characteristic of pregnancy and maternity, are highlighted on page 19 of the report. If the Scottish Government is serious about tackling breastfeeding inequalities, which affect young mothers and those from deprived areas, why are vital support services in NHS Lothian and Greater Glasgow and Clyde, for example, being cut?

My questions are on the theme of the third sector and accountability. My colleague talked about accountability and who is responsible. There is a big emphasis on lived experience. I will give the example of an accountant. An accountant can have lived experience of accounts, but that does not make them a formally qualified accountant.

I have three questions in relation to the delegation of accountability in the third sector. My first question is about an organisation, Scottish Trans, which is funded by the SNP Government and which has publicly argued that men can breastfeed babies despite the risks to the infant and the risks of synthetic hormone-induced secretions. That has not been clinically trialled because of the risks.

Pregnant and breastfeeding women face huge restrictions on what they can eat and drink. A recent example that one mother gave me was that pregnant women cannot even have a Lemsip Max. Pregnant women are being told that there are restrictions on what they can eat, drink and put into their bodies. However, Scottish Trans is advocating for a process that uses synthetic hormones. It openly criticises the Equality and Human Rights Commission for a perceived lack of protection for men who want to “breastfeed”. The whole thing, minister and cabinet secretary, is unsafe and completely bonkers.

Earlier, I referenced the cuts to breastfeeding support services for women that have been made because of the SNP Government’s funding decisions. Why are ministers continuing to fund Scottish Trans, given that its position is undermining health and safety and evidenced-based policy making?

To ask the First Minister whether he will provide an update on the steps that the Scottish Government is taking as a result of the Supreme Court judgment in For Women Scotland Ltd v the Scottish ministers. (S6F-04252)

What the First Minister has said is a huge insult to women and to the women who are protesting outside today. First Minister, we are not buttoned up at the back. It has been months since the Supreme Court judgment and the Court of Session decision on single-sex toilets in schools. Children have gone back to school now and teachers, some of whom are in the gallery today, are still being told to follow the Scottish National Party Government’s unlawful supporting transgender pupils in schools guidance. They are fearful for their jobs if they do not do so. The City of Edinburgh Council has acted now because delaying would be illegal. This SNP Government is showing wilful ignorance. Why is the First Minister deliberately ignoring the rule of law?

What is your message to women from the Women’s Support Project and the Alnisa service who have concerns? As I said, the Alnisa service reported a 50 per cent increase in the number of FGM cases in 2023. What is your message to such services about your personal commitment to delivering the required changes?