���˿���

Fergus Mutch, in answer to an earlier question from Jamie Halcro Johnston, you said that the chambers of commerce want a competitive personal and business tax regime. We have talked about the challenges that are caused by geography, sector, size and gender. How does that ask regarding the tax regime interact with the other challenges and issues that we have discussed?

That is really helpful. The point you have made here before about strategic support is important for us to remember.

I will come to Stacey Dingwall with a similar question. We have looked at some of the small businesses that we have across Scotland, and we have spoken today about the challenges around resilience, energy costs and all of that. Are we missing elements that would make setting up or supporting small businesses more attractive to people? There have been conversations around the income tax changes that were in the budget and how they are going to affect things. If I understand you rightly, you are saying that some of the types of work in the sectors that you have identified as potentially needing support tend to come in at the lower end and would therefore benefit from lower income tax levels. Can you flesh that out for us a little bit?

Yes.

That is helpful. I think that we sometimes focus on our fiscal incentives, mechanisms and instruments, rather than looking at the whole picture. There is something for us to think about there.

I turn to Clare Reid. Carolyn Currie talked about the importance of financial incentives for people to stay in work and about non-financial incentives such as training and mentoring. Is the SCDI focusing on that? Could Government give more support? Could you ask more of your members, or of the business sector more generally, to ensure that we make employment itself as attractive as possible, rather than focusing only on the financial elements of work?

Thank you, Victor—that is really helpful. I could come back on a couple of points, but I know that the convener is keen to allow everybody to speak, so I will leave it there for now.

Thank you for that. I asked specifically about the impact of the culture wars, which trans people are bearing the brunt of and experiencing. You talked about freedom of expression. We have heard elsewhere in evidence to the committee that freedom exists up to a point where it does not impinge on the freedom of other people to exist. That is an important statement to make.

In the letter that you wrote last month, you spoke about the need to “listen”, and to take account of and evaluate the responses that have been received in the consultation and scrutiny processes that the Scottish Government and the committee have undertaken. In that letter, you said that,

“c�DzԲ��ܱ��ٲ��پ��DzԲ�”

were perhaps not

“sufficiently inclusive of other groups of women”

nor of organisations that represent them.

Given that we have heard from Scottish Women’s Aid; Rape Crisis Scotland and some of its network members; Engender and the Scottish Women’s Rights Centre, all of which support the reforms in the bill, I am interested in which other women’s organisations in Scotland, in the domestic Scottish setting, you have approached, or which have approached you. Where does your evidence come from for calling for the bill to have, as you called it, a comprehensive refresh?

Thank you. I will follow up quickly on two points. The reference to “culture wars” comes from the Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe; that is clearly her statement. Whether or not I agree with this—to be clear, I happen to agree with it—she says that,

“government officials and certain parliamentarians have actively contributed to an intolerant and stigmatising discourse”

within the context of “culture wars”. That is a direct quote from her report.

On the organisations that have been in touch with you, you wrote in your letter about listening clearly to organisations and survivors of violence. It is worth restating that the Scottish Women’s Rights Centre, Rape Crisis Scotland and Scottish Women’s Aid, which all directly support victims and survivors of gender-based violence, all support the reforms.

I appreciate that time is short so I will leave it there, convener.

Good evening, and thank you for joining us this evening. In your opening remarks, you mentioned the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, Dunja Mijatovic, and her report, in which she talks clearly about the stigmatising discourse that Government officials and certain parliamentarians have contributed to, which has contributed to the culture wars around trans rights and the distortion of human rights that has pitted trans rights against women’s rights as a zero-sum game. Could you comment on that and give us a bit more of an explanation about why you have come to your view?

Good evening, Reem. Thank you very much for joining us—I appreciate your making the time to be with us.

I have two questions for you. I would like to explore your reflections on the report by Dunja Mijatovic, the Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe, in which she said,

“Both government officials and certain parliamentarians have actively contributed to an intolerant and stigmatising discourse.”

After that, she critiques the “culture wars” surrounding trans rights in Scotland. She also says in the report that

“trans persons in the UK face increasingly hostile and toxic political and public discourse.”

What your thoughts on her report in general, but also on those two points specifically, given the context in which we are discussing and debating this bill?

I understand that. Professor Chadha, there is something interesting about not necessarily the social security system, but the labour market being a barrier by not enabling flexible work, part-time work or shorter working weeks, for example. What are your comments on that? We often talk about employment and the labour market separately from all the other support mechanisms, but I am trying to make the connections.