Seòmar agus comataidhean

Does Suzi Martin want to come in on that?

Good morning. My question is on the point that Paul O’Kane raised in relation to other commissioners who should be carrying out work to help, support and promote the interests of people who are living with disabilities.

I was interested in the responses to the call for views. An Inclusion Scotland member stated:

“We are very aware of the Children and Young People’s Commissioner, the Scottish Human Rights Commission and the Equality and Human Rights Commission. All do work to promote and protect disabled children’s and adults rights. However, all have wider responsibilities that sometimes mean that disabled people's rights are not their first priority.”

Heather Fisken, even though the SHRC’s and the EHRC’s remits could be strengthened, do you still feel that there would be a gap for disabled people and, because of that, do you think that a disability commissioner is essential?

The point about lived experience is important. I know that we use that phrase a lot in the committee, but what Heather Fisken said shows how important having lived experience within such organisations is in terms of the aims of the bill. Does anyone else want to respond to the question?

That was helpful.

It was helpful, because I am concerned that some sections of the disabled community would have a commissioner while others would not.

From reading the submissions and from feedback that I have had from the disabled community and disability charities, I know that people cannot wait. Action is required now if they are to feel valued and part of something wider that protects them and which encompasses their rights. That is where the buffer is, and there have been explanations as to what could be done to enhance their rights. Do the witnesses support the creation of, for example, a learning disabilities, autism and neurodivergence commissioner?

Good morning, panel. I have listened with interest so far to what you have said about the potential introduction of a disability commissioner. In its submission, the Glasgow Disability Alliance—one of the largest disability organisations in Europe, with more than 5,000 members—has said:

“Despite knowing about the work, especially, of the Scottish Human Rights Commission ... and the Equality and Human Rights Commission ... the consensus is that now, more than ever, Scotland needs a Disability Commissioner whose sole focus is on disabled people”.

We know that organisations have had powers, and we have spoken this morning about potential extensions of powers to make a difference, but it is clear that disabled people still feel disadvantaged and as though they are at the back of the line when it comes to knowing and exercising their rights. How will that change if we do not have a disability commissioner? Jan Savage, can I start with you?

You also mentioned the genital contact aspect. As part of the many articles that have been written about the application in recent times, several interviews have been conducted, including with intimacy co-ordinators. One intimacy co-ordinator says that all genital contact falls within the definition of non-simulated sex. Sex with genital contact was mentioned in phase 2 of the research and development aspect of the application. Do you agree with that statement from the intimacy co-ordinator who was interviewed? If not, what evidence do you have for the contrary position?

That brings me to the guidance and the strategic framework that applications are measured against before they are approved. Who signs off the strategic framework for applications to be approved? Who creates the guidance and the strategic framework?

No, I am just—