Seòmar agus comataidhean

I do not know the data sets in their entirety, so it is hard for me to say that something is missing. That, perhaps, speaks to the problem, because if we do not collect the data routinely, we will not be able to see the complex patterns. In principle, I am asking you to, as a minimum, commit to undertaking a review of when data is disaggregated by gender—and, critically, when it is not—and you could then return to us with a compelling reason why it should not be.

As I said, we all await that report with great interest and anticipation, and, having had Mark Logan before the committee last week, I have high hopes for it.

I have a follow-on question. Are you able to make it compulsory for any agency that receives money from the Scottish Government as part of its fair work agenda—or, indeed, any other business initiative—to routinely collect data disaggregated by gender? I have asked about that a number of times in this committee, so I can tell you categorically that they do not routinely do that, which I find quite shocking.

Two examples spring to mind. I asked whether a business agency routinely disaggregated its research data so that it could understand the breakdown by gender, and the answer was that it did not. I also asked a commerce and development agency whether it routinely did that, and I received the same answer. I would expect that to be done, as a minimum.

I suppose that what I am asking is whether, regardless of Ana Stewart’s review, you agree that, as a minimum, any agency that receives money from the Scottish Government should routinely gather and disaggregate that data.

I completely agree. I agree that it is complex and that it is a case of being careful what you wish for, particularly when it comes to early-stage industries. However, we should look at such an approach with an open mind and stress that agencies will have to do so, too, as a way of shifting the dial. Mark Logan, who appeared before the committee last week, was clear about the fact that the initiatives that are under way are good in and of themselves, but what he emphasised, and what drives me, is that we should start to plant the trees that will effect structural change. Unless we ask such hard questions and start to look much more firmly at conditionality in areas in which we can be clear about, or at least make a good assessment of, the outcomes, we will carry on producing worthy reviews—I agree that reviews such as the Stewart review are worth while—but we will not shift the dial.

Thank you.

Going back to my earlier point about data, I note that, as individual projects are planned, I will want to see specific data on the percentage or numerical increase in female entrepreneurs in each category. There are various projects. I will be asking to see that data so that I can make my own assessment of how bold and ambitious we are.

Good morning, Deputy First Minister. Thank you for attending today’s meeting.

I want to follow up on a deeply held interest of mine: the role of women and their contribution and entrepreneurialism. Our pre-budget calls mentioned disaggregation of data and progress on the women’s business centre. I thank you for the replies from the Scottish Government, but the ironic thing is that, in our pre-budget letter last year, we also asked about disaggregation of data.

Before I ask my questions, I say that I recognise the worthwhile efforts of the Scottish Government to promote this area, and we all look forward with interest and anticipation to Ana Stewart’s review.

Setting that aside, I have three simple questions to move us away from the review and get under the skin of what is a structural issue. First, can you play a part in ensuring that all data that is collected by the Scottish Government is routinely disaggregated by gender?

I have a final question on the same theme. You might not be able to answer this just now, but I would like you to give consideration to setting targets to increase the participation of women, particularly with regard to entrepreneurialism, and to give firm consideration to—and, if this is not possible, to say why you cannot do it—making any funding conditional on meeting those targets.

I am going to ask some more questions about women entrepreneurs. When NSET was published, we saw the introduction of a number of worthwhile initiatives. Given the thrust of that approach, who would not buy into it? However, I want to explore in a bit more detail how you will ensure that, as we move into specific projects, female entrepreneurs will be at the heart of the strategy, so that when you develop your key performance indicators or whichever success measures you will have, they will be specific.

For example, in the context of the development to begin under project 1, the delivery plans state that there will be commitments to

“Increase the number of talented early stage company founders”

and

“Increase the number and diversity of entrepreneurs”.

I am not asking you to answer this question now, but I would want to know the levels to and from which you expect female entrepreneurs in early-stage start-ups to move. Will you be able to state that, and do you plan to do so as you put in the detailed development?

Secondly, are you able to commit to making the targets bold, audacious, ambitious and, frankly, frightening in terms of moving the dial for female entrepreneurs and their contributions?

Thank you.