Chamber and committees

More multiyear funding and more services will be provided but, of course, that will happen only if people vote for the budget.

Yes.

On the timing of the review as set out in the equalities and human rights mainstreaming action plan, we remain committed to publishing a full process evaluation of the new approaches early this year, and the work to evaluate both the strategic integrated impact assessment and the tagging pilots is already well under way.

As part of the evaluation, we will engage with stakeholders on the improvements made and their priorities for future iterations of the new strategic integrated impact assessment, and the findings from that evaluation will directly inform and strengthen our approach for the 2027-28 budget. The plans for publication are, I think, to be confirmed post the election, so it will be there for the new Government coming in and in good time for the next budget cycle.

Good morning. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak to you today.

The budget and the spending review reflect our priorities and values as a Government. I am very proud of the choices that we have made, which have fairness at their heart, to ensure that every pound of public money spent delivers the greatest possible benefit for the people of Scotland. The budget—which is, of course, set against a backdrop of constrained resources and a rising demand for public services—will invest almost £68 billion to secure a fair, healthy, safe, prosperous and green society for the Scottish people.

As we navigate that challenging economic and fiscal environment, we also have a duty to ensure that our decisions advance equality and protect the most vulnerable. Our ambition is to ensure that every policy decision improves lives for those who need it most across Scotland. On 19 January, we published our first strategic integrated impact assessment of the likely impacts of the decisions taken in the budget, the spending review and the infrastructure delivery pipeline on people in Scotland. The new approach brings all impact assessments together in a single process and publication to provide a more holistic and transparent view of fiscal decisions. That new approach has been developed in collaboration with international experts and key stakeholders in Scotland, such as the equality and human rights budget advisory group and the National Advisory Council on Women and Girls.

I am pleased that the Scottish Parliament information centre has acknowledged that the new approach has brought “significant improvements”, including a more accessible document, better use of data, stronger links between our aims and our spending, and open recognition of unmet targets. The document does more than any before to address past concerns. Our analysis shows that the Scottish budget redistributes from high-income households to those further down the income distribution scale, through the tax and social security systems and through the delivery of public services. Overall, the decisions taken in the budget, the spending review and the infrastructure delivery pipeline are expected to have a positive or neutral impact across the five statutory duties considered.

This year’s publication also improves budget transparency. For the first time, we show the impacts of spending decisions, as well as the implications of constrained or reduced resources, for disadvantaged groups, including the trade-offs involved and the mitigations considered. The report also presents new and emerging findings from enhanced distributional analysis and pilot activity on budget tagging and intersectional analysis. That evidence was actively used throughout all stages of the process to inform decision making, including—for the third year running—in a cross-ministerial pre-budget workshop. I am grateful to the Minister for Equalities for her continued support and challenge in those important meetings. We intend to evaluate the new approach and will publish the results later this year.

To help today’s session to run smoothly, I note that there will be a hard stop at 11.30 am, when we will join the Cabinet takeover with disabled people, which is an important engagement that reflects Scotland’s leadership in placing lived experience at the heart of decision making. We both look forward to joining that event.

As I said in my opening remarks, the new approach to impact assessments has enabled equalities and human rights evidence to shape decisions earlier and more effectively than before. Rather than directing the analytical effort towards producing a document—which was perceived as somewhat lengthy—at the end of the cycle, the new approach focuses resources on generating insight at the moments when choices can genuinely be influenced and decisions are made. That shift has allowed us to make better-informed decisions for all three fiscal events.

The evidence gathered, including lessons from the pilot activities, was actively used at every stage of the budget process. That included, for example, integrating impact analysis directly into ministerial advice at key decision points, so that ministers would have it in front of them. It also provided a structured briefing for the ministerial workshop in November, which had a particular focus on eradicating child poverty and sustaining high-quality public services. We also ensured that the emerging assessment was shared at critical junctures in the process, including Cabinet discussions, which were really important for sign off. That meant that ministers were able to consider distributional, equalities and rights-based impacts alongside the fiscal, economic and delivery factors when making decisions. We were able to see all that in the round.

The assessments have helped make the budget process more evidence driven, more coherent and better aligned. The approach has been positive.

If I remember rightly, you asked exactly the same question last year, and I think that the minister and I will give the same answer. Organisations—whether it is that organisation or any other organisation—are funded by the Scottish Government for specific programmes. The minister will be able to outline in more detail what those specific programmes are. Many organisations are funded for specific things around mental health and so on. It is not just general funding for an organisation. That has to be done dispassionately, because otherwise we get into a political bunfight about which organisations we like and which we do not like, given our political views. That is not right. We should look at which organisations provide services to vulnerable people who need them and what those services are, without passing judgment on something that we do not like about a particular organisation.

Kaukab, do you want to talk about the specifics that that organisation provides?

We oversee it through the organisation that the minister has just referred to, which does the work because it is closer to the organisations and has knowledge of the detail. If there were any concerns to be flagged, they would of course be flagged. Organisations have to meet all the criteria that every single organisation is required to meet when receiving public money.

It is possible not to like an organisation for your own reasons, but still to recognise the important work that it carries out in supporting young people who are suicidal and could potentially take their own lives. It is possible to separate out those two issues and to recognise that, without those services, young people would be much more vulnerable and, potentially, at risk. I think it is possible to do that.

That is not what was said at all. What was said is that any concerns would be flagged with ministers, and that could put the funding in jeopardy.

I am sure that we will appreciate that but, as you will be aware, we have very robust mechanisms in place that would flag any concerns about an organisation that would require us to revisit funding, for instance.

Nobody said that it was a good thing that domestic abuse cases were rising. Domestic abuse is a scourge on our society and has been for many years, and the reason that cases are rising is that misogyny is rising and men think that it is okay to be violent towards women and girls. That is a global phenomenon—it is not happening only in Scotland—and it should deeply concern us. The rise in domestic abuse cases is a symptom of that.

There are also more women coming forward. Back in my day, when I was growing up, women did not come forward because they were scared to do so, there was no support and their issues were not taken seriously by law enforcement. Thankfully, that has changed.

The reason that I referred earlier to the number of cases coming through the courts—there has been a huge exponential growth in cases of domestic violence and sexual assault—is that more cases are coming forward and are being prosecuted by the authorities. As I said earlier, the Lord Advocate has been very active in this area. That in itself sends out a message to women that they should come forward. We also have a range of support organisations that, back in the day, were just not there.

On the funding that we provide, there is—as the minister said—more funding to support those organisations to support women. Even with all the improvements that have been made to the reporting and court processes, that experience can still be very challenging for women. The organisations that provide that absolutely critical support now have more funding, and multiyear funding through the fairer Scotland fund.

Is there more to do? Absolutely. I started my answer to this area of questioning by saying that the Parliament has done a lot of very good work, on a cross-party basis, to ensure that the law has changed. Just recently, there has been support for women who are fleeing domestic violence. That has turned on its head the attitude that meant that women were the ones who had to leave the home. There has been a sea change in attitudes to all that.

At the same time, however, we see a rise in misogyny, through all the ways that we fully understand. I am proud that we have a Parliament that has taken the issue of domestic abuse so seriously. The money that we provide is important, but it is only one part of the answer. As I said, this is one of the very important areas of the budget that has been given more money. The organisations that provide support have been given the certainty of multiyear funding and, as a result, they are able to plan more effectively for the work that they do.