Seòmar agus comataidhean

Policy areas are expected to conduct an equality impact assessment during the policy cycle to inform their decisions. That is a clear expectation. Those assessments should draw on available evidence, as you say, to show the impact on groups with protected characteristics and the effectiveness of any mitigation measures.

It is important that we track that bit, too. We expect portfolios to develop evidence so that they can take account of the impact of the budget on groups with protected characteristics and make that connection with the scale of the impact of the proposed spend. As you say, there is a range of quantitative and qualitative evidence. That is where participation and lived experience come into it. That is especially important with marginalised groups such as the BAME community.

That can be translated into policy in a variety of ways. For example, officials are happy to receive briefings from external organisations. I meet with Engender, the Coalition for Racial Equality and Rights and many others—I will not list them all because I always miss folk out. Organisations and individuals may participate in formal consultation exercises, and published work may feature evidence reviews and support policy development. For example, the equality analysis team is currently finalising an evidence review on the experiences of non-binary people in Scotland. That action was set out in the non-binary action plan, which is to be published shortly. Similar exercises are undertaken across the protected characteristics, including the BAME community. I hope that that gives you some reassurance.

I will split that one between myself and Nick Bland as well. I will give you my view on it and what I am trying to achieve, and Nick will do the technical side of the data. We will do a double-hander.

As I alluded to in my opening remarks, the value that I can add is through working very closely with the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government, and through making sure that I have access to the cabinet secretaries who are making those decisions. I have arranged one-to-one bilaterals with each of the cabinet secretaries. I am starting with the Cabinet Secretary for Transport this week, in fact, so that work is now well under way.

In terms of improvements, the difference between now and what happened before is that, last year, the equalities minister simply attended those meetings. This year, my role has been enhanced; I have been given a specific role at the table and I am taking an active part. I will have one-to-one bilaterals with each cabinet secretary who makes those decisions, based on connecting the data. As the cabinet secretary put it, my role is to step back and see the wood for the trees—to make those connections and put them front and centre.

For instance, when I have my one-to-one with the Cabinet Secretary for Transport, there is no doubt that I will be able to draw on the equality impacts of budget decisions in relation to transport. They may have a knock-on effect on town planning, for instance, or schools or the availability of healthcare. In my role, I can provide those connections and therefore urge the cabinet secretaries to consider those outcomes when they are making a decision in their portfolio.

One element of my role is about seeing the knock-on effects, but I can also convene and pass information between the cabinet secretaries. With the best will in the world, Government is a big machine; everyone is in their bit trying to do the best job that they can, and they do not always have that.

That leads me to the cultural change that is required of all of us to see things not only from our own point of view, but to make those connections. I am leading on that, and I am pursuing it vigorously. I am reporting back to the cabinet secretary on how the bilaterals go, and I will make recommendations on that.

Another key bit that I am providing is support to the officials who support the cabinet secretaries. We are working within Government so that our papers and evidence gathering all align and are bringing everything together to give a clearer picture.

Nick Bland can speak about the specific data.

You are right to highlight the work of the external agencies. They do a power of work to provide evidence on that to Government; it certainly comes to me. I cannot say 100 per cent that it goes to everyone else, but the copy lists are fairly wide. That is where my role as the Minister for Equalities comes in. The cabinet secretary has asked me to work collaboratively to support cabinet secretaries when they are making decisions, to ensure that they are cognisant of the exact kind of scenario that you bring up.

I said that I was meeting people in the transport portfolio this week, and I will meet the Minister for Housing. I will put those issues front and centre in our discussions, so that he can take cognisance of them when he is making his housing budget decisions. That is a progressive way of working. That is where I add value, given the background that I come from, the awareness and information that I have and the skills that I developed when I was on this committee.

You are right to say that that kind of intersectional data set could be quite small and that it might not figure in the evidence. That is where the collaborative and supportive work comes in. Remember that I am there to support, but I am also there to challenge—that is a key part of my role as Minister for Equalities—because we know that further work requires to be done. We are absolutely making progress, but evidence on culture is very difficult to capture unless a human being is presenting it. I would argue that it is the role of an equalities minister to do that.

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to reinforce the message that I gave at the beginning of my contributions. You have highlighted health in particular. As equalities minister, I cannot be expected to deal with such in-depth detail on each portfolio. I would be expected, as you said, to highlight the equality impacts that can happen and to draw them out by working with my cabinet secretary and portfolio leads in those areas, so that they are cognisant of the issues. I would do that on rurality as I would in relation to disabled people and all the different issues.

During the summer, I had the chance to visit different locations. One issue that was raised was that it costs much more money to build houses in certain areas. Transporting materials, for instance, is easier in the central belt.

The approach is about looking at budget decisions and making sure of accessibility and availability. My job is to support my colleagues so that they see decisions through that lens, and I assure you that I will do my absolute best on that.

Thank you for that question. Obviously, our approach to impact assessments is guided by the need to meet our statutory duties while ensuring that our approach is proportionate. I note that a full analysis will continue to be provided annually as part of the Scottish budget process. We remain committed to protecting the most vulnerable in society and we have sought to minimise the impact on people as much as possible through identifying underspends and pausing or slowing activity.

In the interests of transparency, on 3 October, less than a month after the pre-budget fiscal statement, the Scottish Government published the details of the equality and fairer Scotland impact assessments that were provided by portfolios. We aim to publish those assessments as quickly as possible following policy decisions. For example, we will often provide impact assessments alongside regulations when they are laid and when legislation is amended.

I hope so—I think that we are making progress in lots of areas. My role is to look at the bits where we are getting stuck. That is about providing the tools and the support. I know that my officials, who are experts in that area, are ready and waiting to support not only ministers and cabinet secretaries but their supporting officials, because the documents that they produce and the evidence that they gather will be expected to have equalities embedded in them right from the beginning, so that equalities are not dealt with in a report back to me as a bolt-on feature.

When I was a member of this committee, I always said that equalities should not be bolted on to a process at a later stage but should be part of the process right at the beginning. I am optimistic about that, and Mr O’Kane will know that I will be thorough in pursuing evidence of that and holding my colleagues to their responsibilities with regard to that challenge. I assure him that they are absolutely up for that.

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.