I am referring to the short-life working group.

The way I interpret that answer is that not much has happened with the short-life working group. It has stalled and has not had much engagement, and it is almost as if it has been put to one side and that separate meetings have taken place with the Government. Is that a fair assessment?

Good afternoon, minister.

We welcome the fact that you have said that no one wants anybody to be excluded. We also welcome the fact that you said that the Scottish Government wants to follow the law. This morning, we had a very important session with the EHRC. It said that, basically, a lot of the leadership resides with the Scottish Government on this, while accepting your point about monitoring and enforcement.

Vuyi Stutley talked about the Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act 2021 and mentioned in a comment that if nobody is going to be included, sex is excluded from the 2021 act. I think that it is important to state that point. Vuyi Stutley, do you want to add anything on that?

Great. I am not going to go into it—do not worry.

This disproportionately affects women with religious or cultural requirements, survivors of trauma and women who simply need privacy from the opposite sex, so this does directly undermine the Scottish Government’s efforts to increase female participation in sport and physical activity. I quoted the inquiry that the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee did, and it has a section on this very subject. What is happening is, in many cases, incompatible with the public sector equality duty. My question is: how will the Government measure whether current leisure provision is advancing equality of opportunity for women and girls, particularly those who require single-sex spaces for cultural, religious and both physical and psychological safety reasons?

You have enforcement powers. Will you be considering those enforcement powers?

Jennifer, we will cover the outcomes later, so perhaps we can focus on the immediate question for now. As a region MSP, I cover several educational authorities, IJBs and council areas, and I have had extensive meetings with all of them. I want to discuss a local example with you but, before I do, I would like to ask about the Scottish Government short-life working group that was established in April 2025 on taking forward the Supreme Court judgment. Last night, I went to the website to look at the composition of the group and I noticed that it talks about the EHRC as a key stakeholder and that the minutes suggest that the EHRC is active in engagement. I could not find out what advice the EHRC gave to the working group, so could you tell me? I note that there have been no minutes since last August.

But the Supreme Court judgment was just a clarification of the law. The legislation has been in place since 2010. Under the Equality Act 2010, there are nine protected characteristics.

I have given three examples: one in Angus, which relates to changing facilities for schoolchildren; one in Aberdeen city; and one in Aberdeenshire. I recognise that the EHRC has only 20 employees in Scotland, but the issue is about enforcement and equality of opportunity, and politicians who represent the community are being dismissed. What enforcement have you been doing since 2010, including in relation to leisure centres and swimming pools?

Thank you; you have answered the question.

As you have mentioned, following the Supreme Court judgment, the law is clear. Has the EHRC started work on an awareness campaign for employers, so that there are no more tribunals like one in the Sandie Peggie case? I have asked officers in my community which guidance they are following, and it seems that, even though parts of the old technical guidance have been taken down—and there is a view that, to be direct, that guidance needs binning—employers are still relying on it, and it is still being referenced in court cases. Does the EHRC have a workaround for the sort of muddle that we are in right now, with people referring to old guidance that should be binned?

Right, okay. Thank you for putting that on the record.

I am building on my colleague Pam Gosal’s questions in terms of justice. I talked to the EHRC about the short-life working group—I looked at it on the website last night, but it seems to have stalled. It was supposed to meet every two weeks, then it met every month, and then nothing. The minutes have not been shared since August. What is your role on that short-life working group, minister? Have you met it? No.

On justice and the overlap with the PSED, minister, have you met the Cabinet Secretary for Justice in relation to the requirements of the PSED? Have you had separate meetings with Angela Constance about this? No. Okay, thank you.

I want to talk about justice, but first I want to mention the swimming pools and leisure centres example and focus on that. We covered it at some length earlier, and I am assuming that you have watched the session this morning. I quoted Stonehaven swimming pool as an example. Women and girls self-exclude from swimming when they cannot access single-sex spaces. I gave an example from Stonehaven. This disproportionately affects women—

12:30