���˿���

Minister, I spoke to the EHRC earlier about the interpretation of the law. Without naming any specific cases, you will know that there are on-going issues with regard to the interpretation of the law, including the regulations. I would not say that people are confused, but they are all interpreting the law in their own way—every organisation is. You are right: not every organisation is going out to basically not have those facilities, or to have them. Again, though, the issue is out there, and the waters are pretty muddy. People do not know what they are doing, and the fact is that more and more legal cases are going to come forward, so that clarity can be provided.

Can you shed some light on this, minister? Are you aware that interpretation is not clear? I have talked about regulations, and I mentioned the Equality Act 2010 earlier. Are people complying with them? Do you see that the water out there is pretty muddy when it comes to how people—and organisations, especially—are interpreting the law?

You said that further work is needed on the drivers. Is that work being done?

I also want to touch on race, and the fact that people of colour—women, especially—are more disadvantaged in terms of the gender pay gap. Can you say anything about that? You said that work needs to be done in general, but is any work being done in that area?

Can I probe into that? If a lesbian group excludes trans women, would you say that it is not compliant with the Equality Act 2010?

Thank you. You talked about guidance. Is the law clear on that? I am considering what is happening out there—obviously without talking about a specific case. Is it clear that your guidance states what it states and that the people and organisations that provide services must comply with it, or are there grey areas on which people out there are not getting compliance right?

There are many organisations that make a lot of decisions on their own heads. Those are not collective decisions and they are not decisions that are based on policy or regulation—they are making their own decisions within their own organisations. How can a bit more clarity be provided? How can you give guidance so that people know exactly where they stand when no single-sex spaces or services are provided?

Minister, I have a few questions, so I ask you to bear with me.

I want to ask about a point that I have brought up with many witnesses. There are nine protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010, and characteristics such as religion and sex come into conflict with issues around gender identity. For example, as I brought up in relation to the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill, many BAME and religious women do not feel comfortable having procedures such as smear tests and breast examinations performed by biological males, including trans women. Similarly, Sandie Peggie was suspended for refusing to share a changing room with a biological male who did not even have a gender recognition certificate. All too often, it looks as if women are thrown under the bus in favour of trans ideology. Will that be the case for every woman of religion or colour if they come forward and say they cannot undress in front of or be examined by a biological male? Do you think that it is okay for women and girls, including those of BAME and religious backgrounds, to be undressing in front of biological males?

The Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992 state that changing rooms

“shall not be suitable unless they include separate facilities for, or separate use of facilities by, men and women where necessary for reasons of propriety”.

It is the Scottish Government’s duty to ensure that all public bodies comply with such regulations. However, we have seen female nurses and female police officers being forced to share changing facilities with biologically male colleagues. Why are the health boards and Police Scotland not complying with the regulations?

Thank you.

Does anybody else want to come in on that question? It appears not.

My next question is for Jill Wood. Do you think that lesbian clubs and associations with 25 or more members should be able to exclude all males, including those with gender recognition certificates?

You would not be able to comment on the issue.

You are absolutely right that we should not discriminate against anybody. I would like to dive into what you said about the policies. With regard to the issues that arise in relation to cases such as the police searching somebody or someone in the NHS changing in front of a biological male—or a trans woman, I should say—do you think that the law is not clear enough, or is the problem with the policies and guidance? As I said to Rohini Sharma Joshi, there is a lot of confusion out there, and—whether it is in the police, the NHS or wherever—someone does one thing and thinks that they are obeying the law, but someone else does something else and thinks that they are obeying the law. Everybody is very confused.

I think that people from all backgrounds, whatever they believe in, feel that they are in a position in which their performance on the public sector equality duty is not what it should be, because the law is not clear. Do you think that everyone is interpreting it in their own way? Should the Scottish Government be doing more to provide clarity through guidance or policy on the issue?