Chamber and committees

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?

Good morning, minister. I have a couple of questions. In its response to the committee, the Women’s Support Project talked about the delay in refreshing the national FGM guidance and implementing the act. It mentioned the perception that there is a lack of capacity in the Scottish Government’s equalities team. Are you satisfied that that team has the resources to deliver progress?

You will be familiar with the Alnisa service for women and girls across the NHS Lothian area who have experienced FGM. It reported a 50 per cent increase in the number of FGM cases in 2023. Members of that service will be watching today. What is your message to organisations such as the Women’s Support Project and the Alnisa service, particularly those that are massively concerned that the act has not been implemented yet?

I welcome today’s debate. It is so important to shine a light on what women and girls in Scotland are experiencing today. There is a mismatch—the Scottish National Party Government’s aspiration in this area has not been matched by delivery. Wherever we look, from a woman’s earnings to her experience of the healthcare system, women in Scotland are too often still getting a raw deal.

The pay gap between men and women is widening. Women still experience poorer health outcomes for a range of issues. Gynaecological conditions are frequently misunderstood and misdiagnosed, and too many women are still not believed. Too many women are stuck on waiting lists for breast reconstruction and gynaecological services. Women are still more likely to live in poverty. Childcare is often inaccessible and unaffordable for working parents. The number of domestic abuse incidents is rising in Scotland, but the justice system is stacked against traumatised women, who cannot even find a legal aid solicitor to take their case.

The SNP Government says that it has strengthened the law in relation to violence against women and girls, but it keeps playing for time on making non-fatal strangulation a stand-alone crime. Fiona Drouet is having to take a civil case against her daughter’s strangler and abuser, who was given community service after her daughter took her own life due to what he did to her. How is that justice?

The document that we are debating today feels more like an SNP public relations exercise than a genuine, well-intentioned attempt to grapple with the systemic challenges that hold women back. It does not grasp the basics, either, such as protecting the rights and dignity of women and girls. The irony of the SNP Government publishing a statement on gender policy coherence is not lost on the women who have been fighting for years to protect their sex-based rights from the SNP’s thoroughly incoherent policies on sex and gender.

What timing, when human rights charity Sex Matters wrote to the SNP Government this week to warn of legal action within 14 days if it keeps failing to comply with the UK Supreme Court’s ruling on biological sex. In today’s call to MSPs, the EHRC again made it clear that the law must be followed now. How can John Swinney claim that protecting the rights of women has been one of his top priorities when his Government continues to unlawfully deny women and girls their dignity and privacy in changing rooms and toilets?

That is the reality across Scotland’s captured public bodies. The public sector equality duty is not working. The SNP Government is repeatedly dragging its feet on implementing the Supreme Court’s ruling, and its moral cowardice means that men can still access women’s single-sex spaces.