Equality and Human Rights Budget Advisory Group minutes: September 2023

Attendees and apologies

Chair

•  Angela O'Hagan (AOH)

Speakers

• Graeme Wilson (GW)
• Fergus Boden (FB)

Attendees

• Ali Hosie (AH)
• Emma Congreve (EC)
• Carmen Martinez (CM)
• Chris Birt (CB)
• Rob Priestley (RP)
• Simon Wakefield (SW)
• Tom Lamplugh (TL)
• Fiona Robertson (FR)
• Joanne Briggs (JB)
• Misa Martincova (MM)

Observers

• Jacqueline Farmer (JF)
• Julia McCombie (JM)

Apologies

• Nick Bland
• Jamie MacDougall
• Joanna Anderson

Secretariat

• Joe Chalmers (JC)/Naomi Clark (NC)

Items and actions

Welcome

AOH welcomed the group and updated them on her recent engagement with the Deputy First Minister and the Minister for Equalities, Migration and Refugees, the publication of the responses to the EHRBAG recommendations and the first meeting to discuss the EHRBAG action plan as part of the Scottish Government’s response. AOH also updated the group on actions from the group’s action tracker.

Programme for Government

Overview

FB summarised the Programme for Government process and explained the slightly different approach this year and the key differences from last year. The key priorities this year include increased alignment to both the Policy Prospectus and the budget process; and increased collaboration.

FB explained the Policy Prospectus aims to highlight the Scottish Government’s intended outcomes and the Programme for Government then provides the actions for meeting these during the parliamentary year. There has also been an addition of issuing mandate letters to Cabinet Secretaries this year and this reflects the actions required over the financial year.

FB noted collaboration was also slightly different this year, working with smaller groups including Senior Civil Servants and also more engagement with stakeholders, including the Permanent Secretary and the Deputy First Minister meeting with the NACWG.

FB went on to detail the practical steps taken within the process this year to improve alignment, like working closely with Scottish Exchequer, Fairer Scotland and Mainstreaming colleagues. This year, was the first year that the PfG was able to utilise the Equality and Fairer Scotland Budget Statement commission when it was issued to portfolios and the intention is to   start aligning more closely with the budget process. There have been benefits of this, including being able to support staff capacity in spreading the ask of information requests over a longer period.

FB finally discussed the assurance part of the process, and explained that commitments are being tested against various criteria such as affordability and fairness. This also allowed areas to distinguish policy areas and where responsibility lies. FB concluded by mentioning the input from Fairer Scotland and Mainstreaming colleagues in the quality assurance of the document.

Fairer Scotland Duty

GW explained to the group the approach taken to ask portfolios to respond to the Fairer Scotland Duty within the Programme for Government process. GW noted the key areas like the requirement of the Duty to be applied to strategic decisions and the focus on inequality of outcomes.

Portfolios were asked to provide brief statements and supporting evidence in line with their work areas. The contents of these were then collated and developed into an overarching statement in the Programme for Government annex. The earlier interaction at the PfG stage this year has allowed for the ability to understand if the Fairer Scotland Duty is being sufficiently met and what further improvements are required by the stage of the EFSBS.

Equality

RP spoke to the group about how equality information was collected from portfolios this year. This included confirmation that relevant EQIAs were being undertaken or had been completed alongside a statement of how PFG commitments aligned to the Public Sector Equality Duty. RP commented on the noticeable difference in the returns from portfolios that had seen an increased investment and focus of building equality and human rights capability, for example DG Economy.

RP explained Accountable Officers were also in place to provide assurance and that the statements produced by portfolios were reviewed by the Executive Team twice. RP noted that there was still a lot of lessons to learn, for example, there needs to be more equality consideration at the start of the process and an increase in good quality intersectional data.

RP advised that over the next few months, that the Scottish Government will be exploring what will be published and when in future year. Noting key points, that Programme for Government colleagues like FB will be involved in the budget process this year and a movement to assurance being the responsibility of individual portfolios was important.

AOH thanked colleagues, noting that EHRBAG have been pursuing this alignment for over the last 20 years and acknowledged that the work being taking forward is encouraging to hear.

EFSBS Session

Overview

SW spoke to the group about the EFSBS process this year, in line with the previous discussion on the Programme for Government. SW reflected on the EFSBS process last year and the lessons learned from this that have informed the changes to the process this year. This includes looking at the publication itself and considering what information would the most helpful to the users.

The EFSBS this year, will have a three-stage approach:

• stage 1: Early commission to portfolios
• stage 2: Analysis and consideration
• stage 3: Focus on budget decisions

Portfolios have been given more time with their commission this year, which was a key part of feedback we took on board. Recognising that budget time is a demanding time for colleagues as is, SW and team have looked at how we can reduce the quantity of asks over this period and allow for portfolios to spend longer on gathering the information being asked.

Alongside this, SW is looking to explore with OECD running a gender budgeting pilot in two portfolios later this year, however, this is still to be confirmed with OECD and he will update the group in due course.

Discussion

AOH asked about the use of the EFSBS and how the impacts of maintaining, increasing and reducing spend are being captured. SW highlighted the quantity of the information provided but questioned if all of the data was useful. Noting that the gender budgeting pilots could potentially provide a good opportunity to look into this further.

AOH observed that the two step approach of outcomes and actions could also link to the EFSBS to help provide a fuller illustration for users. As well as, for example, looking at scrutiny and assessment, and how are the tools or resources when making these decisions being used.

CB spoke about his recent Committee attendance and the challenge of not having the data available to answer the questions being asked or have a fully informed discussion. SW acknowledged this and spoke about a separate distributional analysis document that will also be published that will include data on Social Security, age, sex and disability.

JF noted it was important to ensure the data being used was the correct data, and from a financial audit perspective, this is often something they encounter. JF also went on to speak about not letting perfection get in the way of progress and when there are no past benchmarks to score from, the proposed route would be to outline expectations and then critically analyse ones that are not met. Reinforcing the importance of documenting these.

TL built on the points previously made and highlighted the scope for the evaluation of EFSBS. TL noted he had recently been working on evaluation within his own work and has learning to share with SW.

Action: TL and SW to meet to discuss evaluation of EFSBS

AOH highlighted the point made in earlier meeting in response to monitoring actions and commented on the proliferation of policy and commitments, questioning what measures are in place to capture outcomes and impacts; and how are they connecting with each other. Noting the possibility from the conversation on the Policy Prospectus and Programme for Government that can make this easier.

AOH also commented on response to SW question about different publications being published over the Budget process, to whether this would help internally and noted it would perhaps help with pre-budget scrutiny.

SW noted the opportunity for transparency and accountability, as well as, influencing the decision making process. RP noted the challenge in being able to balance this effectively.

EC built on this point and the realities of how useful the information would be. Noting it is important for analysis to be available before decisions have been made but the reality is that it is not as possible to be transparent in a public document as you can be with internal analysis.

TL added it may not be all and nothing in this space, and that upon investigation that some information could be published in line with the Programme for Government but perhaps not everything.

AOH recognised the challenges of the area but noted the need to overcome this, if there is to be consistency with the political commitments. AOH welcomed SW to follow up with the group as the work progresses.

AOH thanked colleagues for the discussion and concluded the meeting.

Any other business

The next meeting for the Equality and Human Rights Budget Advisory Group is scheduled for 19 October 2023 and will be discussing pre-budget scrutiny.