Seòmar agus comataidhean

Can you explain that, because I am finding it difficult to understand?

I will leave it there but, unfortunately, there are people who are self-excluding because they do not want to come out and say what they are experiencing. As a result, they do not access services because of their fears or concerns. That is just one side of the argument.

I want to ask about your experience of different international models. Obviously, jurisdictions across the world are very different.

Can you talk us through how you see the differences between Scotland and other jurisdictions? For example, you said that in some of the countries that now have self-ID, medical documentation might have to be produced. There is not a standardised approach. How can we learn from the various examples? Do you have a favoured country that has taken an approach that you agree with? On what principle has that been established?

I will say it again. What did you mean by “unintended consequences” of not specifically collecting data by gender and sex, under section 9, which you mentioned?

I will ask Robin White a similar question. You used the example of burglary to talk about the collection of sex data. On the basis of what Professor Sullivan just said regarding the unintended consequences, are there other areas in which you might differ in terms of the collection of data and the definition of sex and gender in that regard? Could you also comment on why it would not be right for Police Scotland to collect data on sex when it comes to more serious crimes such as domestic violence, murder, rape and abuse?

It was about my take on the issue. Obviously, everyone has human rights and everyone has concerns about those, regardless of whether they are trying to better trans rights or to protect women’s rights. That is how it is, as the committee has heard. Should the exemptions that are set out in the Equality Act 2010 be looked at from the point of view of how we are evolving as a society? Given the different asks of people, the law needs to move on. Do you have an opinion on that?

I wanted address you by your full name.

Cathy Asante mentioned that the SHRC recommends a post-legislative review following the reform. However, the Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland expressed a different view. He expressed concern that more research is needed to ensure that safeguards are in place before the age is reduced from 18 to 16, suggesting that pre-legislative evidence should be taken more seriously by the Scottish Government before the Parliament makes significant changes. Can you comment on his view and explain your reasoning for supporting the lowering of the minimum age? That question could also be for Barbara Bolton or Ian Duddy.

I hope that I am not repeating anything, but my question is for Professor Sullivan to start off with. The week before last, Dr Guyan told the committee that data collection activities in relation to requirements for the public sector equality duty, gender pay reporting, crime and police records and census data

“follow a self-identification approach”.—[Official Report, Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee, 7 June 2022; c 3.]

However, as you said in your opening statement, senior quantitative social scientists have argued about the importance of retaining data on sex. Will you comment on Dr Guyan’s point and on the conflicts among academics?

Can I ask Chris to answer my question before we talk about age?

I will ask the question in a different way. What made you come to that conclusion in your review of the 2002 act?