Chamber and committees

Will the minister take an intervention?

If I have time, I will take an intervention at the end.

As Roz McCall and Rachael Hamilton mentioned, research from For Women Scotland shows that, in 2024, only 13 of the 243 secondary schools in Scotland provided single-sex toilets.

What have we seen today? It is absolutely no surprise that neither of the Government ministers took any interventions from either Labour or the Scottish Conservatives—or, in fact, from their own back benchers, which is telling. They refused. This is a Government that will not tolerate scrutiny unless it is on the Government’s own terms.

I say to Lorna Slater that there is no way that she can equate someone’s bathroom at home with a toilet facility in the NHS—that is absolutely absurd.

Lorna Slater was the only person to use the word “hate”. I am glad that Paul O’Kane brought the debate back. He talked about the need for facts, the balance of rights and the importance of dignity and respect in debate. Maggie Chapman was true to form, with emotion trumping logic and fact. Once again, she used the term “cis”, which so many women, including me, find offensive. Why does the word “woman” need to be qualified?

I also noticed that, until now, the Labour benches were almost empty. I know that members are looking at me and looking down, but it is unsurprising given Labour’s botched U-turn on women’s rights. Mercedes Villalba, you did a brilliant job for your colleagues who were absent by making all your interventions—

We have had enough!

Will the cabinet secretary take an intervention?

I completely agree—that is not engaging in the debate, and it just shows what has happened in the seat of so-called Scottish democracy, which is absolutely shameful.

Presiding Officer, our questions were swerved; sub judice was seized upon; and SNP scripts—as we have seen today—were woodenly read out. Twice now, the SNP Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee convener, Karen Adam, has shut me down when I have been asking questions on these issues.

The public—we see people in the public gallery today—is rightly wondering what the Scottish Parliament is for, if the most salient issues of the day are all but ignored by the party that is in power.

It has fallen to the Scottish Conservatives to bring the debate to the chamber today. We will not let the SNP get away with it. It is through our public services, our schools, the NHS and leisure centres that women and girls most frequently interact with the state. In those settings, they are often at their most vulnerable. They must always be kept safe, and their dignity and privacy must be respected.

However, as Roz McCall and Rachael Hamilton mentioned—

I will.

If I had been allowed to intervene on the cabinet secretary or the minister, I would have asked them about the millions of pounds that the Scottish Government has given to activist groups that are providing guidance, which is being interpreted as law. That is extremely worrying. As we have heard in the debate, the minister can read out a speech, but she probably does not engage with the substance, as Mr Ewing has pointed out.

As Rachael Hamilton said, John Swinney recognises that the law is on the side of women, but the problem is that his SNP Government refuses to enforce it. Lest we forget it, the SNP Government has been arguing in the UK’s highest court that men can get pregnant and become lesbians; John Swinney confirmed at the end of February that he accepts that trans women are women; and he does not regret supporting the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill, which was—thankfully—blocked by the previous Conservative UK Government.

We cannot have a women-only space and let biological men have access to that space. That is common sense. The SNP does not believe that women are adult human females, and it has taken a sledgehammer to the rights and spaces that are afforded to biological women and girls as a result.

In kowtowing to activist organisations such as Stonewall, the SNP Government has allowed self-ID to creep into Scotland’s public sector for years. As I mentioned, the law is being skewed by lobby groups that are being funded by the SNP Government. Faulty guidance is becoming policy, with disastrous consequences, as a result of Nicola Sturgeon’s self-ID obsession. She leaves a dangerous and divisive legacy when she stands down in 2026. As Russell Findlay said, women will not forget that she trashed their rights. The NHS, schools, councils, the Prison Service and the police all jumped on the so-called inclusion bandwagon at the behest of Nicola Sturgeon’s SNP Government. Labour did nothing.

Equality, diversity and inclusion policies in our public bodies have become exclusionary for women. That is why we need leadership and clarity from the SNP Government, and it is why the Scottish Conservatives are calling on John Swinney to issue a directive requiring public sector bodies to provide single-sex spaces for biological women and girls, in line with their legal obligations. It is high time that, after eroding our rights and relegating our needs for years, the SNP put women and girls first.

I say to Audrey Nicoll and Evelyn Tweed that language matters. Gender is a construct; sex is down to biology.

It is no wonder that trust in the Scottish Government has been so badly corroded. The SNP has made an absolute mess of this. Its amendment to the motion says:

“the Scottish Government fully upholds the Equality Act 2010”.

Senior SNP politicians have made similar statements, but the sleekit SNP is at it again. John Swinney is trying and failing to ride two horses on sex and self-ID.

John Swinney thinks that the legal position on single-sex spaces is “crystal clear”, but the SNP’s position is as clear as mud. Week after week, the Scottish Conservatives have been trying to get answers out of the SNP on what on earth is happening with women-only spaces in Scotland’s public bodies. Our requests for ministerial statements were knocked back. Our questions were swerved—

Many of the organisations that have submitted statements say that impact assessments are a tick-box exercise. Even that basic right is not being looked at or measured. What is your view on that?