Seòmar agus comataidhean

I can see where that view comes from, and I am sympathetic to it. The value that I add is in ensuring that there is coherence and in taking a holistic view.

When the committee took evidence on the equality evidence strategy, Dr Alison Hosie from the SHRC said that the reports that we publish give a quantifiable picture of progress against the strategy. She recognised that the progress that we are making will take years to come to fruition. I agree that that could be speeded up, but we want to make sure that we get it right—that is the challenge. Dr Hosie also recognised that the commitment to regular transparent updates has been fulfilled so far and that they need to continue, and I assure you that we will continue to do that.

The NPF vision is reflected in the four key priorities that are expressed in our programme for government, which are fully aligned with the national outcomes. Those priorities are at the heart of everything that we do as an organisation. Following the conclusion of the review of the national outcomes, we will start policy work to further embed the NPF implementation plan, as recommended by the Finance and Public Administration Committee in 2022.

Responses to the Government’s consultation called for increased accountability mechanisms, including clarifying roles and responsibilities, better scrutiny, action to improve Government transparency and making progress towards outcomes. We continue to consider those issues carefully, but I remind the committee that I have not had any direct role in that so far.

The more active role that I am now taking with colleagues seeks to prevent what Mr O’Kane suggests. We need to consider equality impacts earlier, and we are making progress on that. Do we have more to do? Absolutely. Do we have all the data? I would say that we can never have enough data, but it must be quality data that is relevant, and my colleagues must be able to use it. It must provide them with the tools and training so that they can make different decisions or, if they make the same decisions, they will have an enhanced view of the impacts, so any mitigating decisions can then be assessed more thoroughly.

Nick Bland can address that specific point.

No, I have not fed into that, because, as I said earlier, that was before my time, but I can bring Nick Bland in again if you wish further information on that.

I have noted your comments, and I can follow up on the guidance that is used by the independent fund distributor—as I said, it is either “Inspire” or “Aspire”, but I can never remember which one it is. It uses clear monitoring and governance structures. That is all written down, and I can provide you with that evidence.

That is always a challenge, and we want to prevent siloing—I think that that is what you referred to in your question. The eternal conundrum is to get that clarity and that connection and collaboration across portfolios. It is a challenge. There is absolutely no doubt about that.

I say right from the beginning that I have not had a direct role in the setting of the national outcomes. Those were laid in Parliament before my appointment to this role. However, obviously, I have a keen interest.

Nick Bland can come in on this one, because it was before my time—that is the only reason.

Obviously, we want to prevent delays as much as possible, but I cannot give you a definitive answer to that. Where there are suitable course corrections that do not alter the intent of the original action and lessons are learned for the second half of the equality evidence strategy, those will be highlighted. Work on that is on-going, but I am broadly content with the direction of travel.

Analysts across the Scottish Government and the National Records of Scotland are now progressing with the equality data improvement actions set until the end of 2025. Action leads provided an update on progress in September 2024. I can highlight to you that, of the 45 actions in the strategy, 14 are complete, 23 are on course, seven are delayed and one is not yet started. Details of progress and causes for delays are discussed with the EDIP project board on a quarterly basis. An interim review of the equality evidence strategy and EDIP will be published by the end of 2024. That will set out the challenges faced, which can be expected to cover points such as issues with collecting and analysing data, especially with regard to datasets that are too small, for instance, and delays due to indirect processes. For example, some surveys are currently being evaluated, so new data is delayed because of that, as well as there being issues of resourcing and prioritisation, as you would expect.

I will try to answer that question, although it is quite complex, and there are many views on the issue. I listened with interest to the evidence that was given to the committee. It is a conundrum that I wrestle with, as I have a history and an interest in mainstreaming in particular. The matter is actively being considered, and one of the issues is about mainstreaming. I am also getting calls regarding disaggregation and intersectional data. At the moment, I am wrestling with the need to make sure that there is no dilution for any particular group.

One of the calls that I get is to recognise that we are not a homogeneous group, and women are not a homogeneous group, either. We should bear in mind that women make up more than 50 per cent of the population, so they are not technically a minority group, either. However, we know that budgeting has an impact on women, and there can be exponential negative impacts for those who are also disabled or in an ethnic minority, for instance.

That is where I am at the moment. I am considering all those strands and weighing up whether we need to have one thing or the other. Is there a way that we can bring it all together while not having so much data that we do not know what to do with it all? Sometimes, when we gather data on intersectionalities, it can be so small that it is not valid. It is about making sure that we have quality assurance across the piece.

I take extremely seriously my role in mainstreaming equality across all portfolios. The member will be aware of that. Ultimately, I suppose that I should do myself out of a job because, in every portfolio, every minister who makes budget decisions should have the confidence, the tools, the data and everything that they need—[Interruption.]

All countries around the world are grappling with that challenge. I am satisfied that we are making progress and I assure the member and the committee that, in my role, I will continue to provide the service, support and leadership that the true embedding of mainstreaming requires.

Thank you for that question. I have reflected on that issue. On balance, it is an absolute bonus that I had that previous role on the committee, because I can see more clearly the lens through which the citizen sees those things. While the Government does its work and provides its documents, we have to challenge the accessibility of those documents to the average citizen and improve their transparency.

Another reflection is that equalities covers every strand of the various portfolios, but the big fiscal levers and the big budgets do not lie within the equalities budget. The big challenge for me in my role is therefore to encourage, support and challenge my colleagues across portfolios.