Mainstreaming Race in Scottish Parliament’s Committees

CRER was invited by the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee to provide evidence at their Inquiry into Race Equality in February 2023. During this discussion, CRER director Jatin Haria raised the question of whether other committees talk about race equality. This blog aims to provide an answer to how Scottish Parliament’s committees have been engaging with race equality matters.

The Scottish Parliament’s Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee’s remit includes “to consider and report on matters relating to [...] the prevention, elimination or regulation of discrimination between persons […] on racial grounds”.[1] As such, it is expected that the committee will discuss race equality issues. However, it opens up the question of whether other committees also prioritise race equality in their remit.

If race were properly mainstreamed in the Scottish parliamentary system then other committees would also consider the needs of minority ethnic communities across all aspects of Scottish life and create opportunities to support them. In an effort to see if this is a reality, CRER carried out analysis on the debates of the remaining committees to determine whether there is any substantial consideration of race equality in their work.

Records of Committee Meetings come in the form of Official Reports which are regularly made available on the Scottish Parliament website.[2] We looked at meetings from the beginning of Session 6 in May 2021 to Summer 2023. However, a small number of Official Reports were not found on the search function or were assigned to a different committee as part of a joint meeting and thus not included within the research.

Additionally, business in a Committee Meeting can be conducted in private.[3] This meant there was a possibility race equality was discussed in a meeting but not recorded. The likelihood of this occurring was low, as the business taken in private tends to relate to discussions held during the public part of the meeting.

There is a variation of terminology when referring to race equality issues and Black/minority ethnic people. This research used the terms “Black”, “Asian”, “Minority”, “Ethnic”, “BME”, “BAME”, “Marginalised”, “Equality”, “Diversity”, “Race”, “Discrimination”, “Intersectional” and “Gypsy/Traveller” to find discussions where race was relevant.

Phrases such as “Race” and “Black” are homonyms so the meaning of the word depends on context. Where phrases were not relevant, they have been omitted from the analysis; for example, in the Rural Affairs and Islands Committee where business involved “dog races”, that was not included in the analysis as a mention of race.

It should be highlighted that repeated mentions of key words do not mean discussion was relevant or detailed. However, it does serve as an indication of which committees have space for discussions around race and how certain individuals draw attention to the interests of minority ethnic people in committee debates.

In total, 863 reports from the latest election in May 2021 to Summer 2023 were analysed. The findings are represented below in the form of a table.

The number of times that a Member of Scottish Parliament (MSP) mentions race equality should not be directly compared to those who are not MSPs, as MSPs mostly ask questions rather than provide answers. Sometimes these questions are pre-determined and allocated across all the MSPs attending any particular meeting. However, it should be expected that those invited to provide evidence speak more and, thus, have increased mentions. Nonetheless, conclusions should not be drawn strictly from the numbers presented.

Outwith the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee, the committee that mentioned race equality the most was the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee, followed by the Covid-19 Recovery Committee and then the Social Justice and Social Security Committee.

The Health, Social Care and Sport Committee was the only committee to mention race equality issues in more than half of their meetings, in business agendas such as Racism in Cricket, Health Inequalities and Female Participation in Sport and Physical Activity. There were relevant and sustained discussions, particularly around racism, mainly owed to the committee’s inquiry into racism in cricket.

The Covid-19 Recovery Committee covered topics such as Ministerial Statements, Road to Recovery Inquiry and the Vaccination Programme. In some meetings, matters of race equality were only included as passing comments on how certain minority ethnic groups disproportionately suffered from Covid-19 or did not receive the Covid-19 vaccination.

The Social Justice and Social Security Committee mentioned race equality in their meetings around the Charities Bill, the Child Poverty and Parental Employment Inquiry and in Budget Scrutiny. Compared to the aforementioned committees, the Social Justice and Social Security committee had the most significant difference in mentions from MSPs and those providing evidence.

It is concerning that there are so few mentions from MSPs in the Social Justice and Social Security Committee compared to other committees as it could imply they engage less with race equality. This misbalance could be due to the Inquiry into Domestic Violence and Violence Against Women and Girls where MSPs mentioned race and ethnicity eight times whereas individuals who were not MSPs mentioned it 65 times. Yet in the meeting on Refugees and Asylum Seekers, there were only two mentions.

There were a select few MSPs who consistently discussed race equality. In the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee, these mentions were largely attributed to Dr Sandesh Gulhane; in the Covid-19 Committee, Humza Yousaf in his former role of Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care and in Social Justice and Social Security Committee, Foysol Choudhury.

All three MSPs identify themselves as minority ethnic. While they are not the only MSPs that discussed race equality, it is interesting that they mention it the most. Although not analysed here, this trend could equally be the case for witnesses providing evidence. It should not be the sole responsibility of Black minority ethnic individuals to uphold the interests of Black minority ethnic communities.

A figure which warrants attention is the Education, Children and Young People Committee only mentioning race equality in nine out of 58 meetings – especially as agendas that were considered would have probably benefitted from a critical approach to race issues, for example in Violence in Schools discussions, or the Scottish Attainment Challenge Inquiry.

Similar criticisms could be made of the other committees, such as the Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture committee or the Citizen Participation and Public Petition committee.

While the Scottish Parliament’s committees appear to consider race equality in their meetings, there should be a more robust approach. A simple mention of race is not sufficient to create change for minority ethnic communities, nor is it actively campaigning for anti-racism. In some instances, it can be tokenistic to drop the word ‘race’ in a meeting to appear engaged with race equality.

It is also the things unsaid which are worrying. Committees such as the Education, Children and Young People Committee should aim to increase their focus on race, as there are many avenues they could take to improve the lives of minority ethnic people. This does not mean every committee needs an agenda around race; it means that where possible, race should be discussed within the context of the agenda.

All MSPs who sit on committees must make a conscious effort to do so; it cannot be left to certain individuals to continue driving the conversation towards race equality. This could be in the form of encouraging other attendees through leading questions or inviting experts on race equality to the table. Committees must make an active push to ensure that race is considered in a constructive manner so that the evidence provided is robust and informed.

Only when race equality has been mainstreamed can action be taken through scrutiny and official recommendations. Without race equality at the heart of our government’s priorities, we cannot begin to hope for a reduction in the structural racism that we still see today.

[1] A remit refers to the areas which the committee is responsible for. Committees can look at anything in their remit. See here: https://www.parliament.scot/chamber-and-committees/committees/about-committees

[2]The Official Report is a written record of what is said in public meetings of the Scottish Parliament and its committees. See here: https://www.parliament.scot/chamber-and-committees/official-report

[3] Committees have the right to conduct business in private. The decision must be taken on the merits of each individual piece of business. See here: Guidance on Operation of Committees paragraphs 4.16 to 4.21.