‘We don't want to go back to court', says women's group over gender ruling delay
For Women Scotland (FWS) challenged the meaning of a woman in the Gender Representation on Public Boards (Scotland) Act, with the UK's highest court ruling the definition in the 2010 Equality Act referred to biological sex.
The decision is likely to have far-reaching implications for transgender people in accessing services, but the Scottish Government has declined to make changes to guidance until the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) issues its own guidance, which is expected to take place in the coming months.
But speaking at a fringe event at the Scottish Conservative conference in Edinburgh, FWS co-director Susan Smith said the group was considering a further legal challenge against the Government.
Speaking to journalists after the event, she said: 'We have spoken to the Scottish Government and asked them to withdraw some of this guidance, just to say that it's under review – they don't have to re-issue anything at this point – because it's clearly unlawful, we really do need some action.
'They're telling us they have to wait for the EHRC revised guidance and we don't believe this is true.'
Ms Smith added that, if a woman were to be assaulted in prison by a transgender prisoner, the Government could be taken to court by the victim.
'I think they need to step up and take a bit of responsibility because these things are under their remit,' she said.
She added: 'We don't want to go back to court, we really, really don't, but if we don't see some action that may be something we will have to consider.'
Ms Smith said the group is speaking with its lawyers but she would not say if there was a timeline for action to begin.
The co-director stressed that if ministers were concerned about a challenge to their guidance from the pro-trans rights side of the argument, they should be worried about one from FWS and other such groups too.
'They seem worried about a legal challenge from the other side,' she said.
'But my message to them would be they should be more worried about a legal challenge from the people who have the law on their side.'
Ms Smith was joined at the fringe meeting – which was hosted by Tory MSP Pam Gosal – by former foreign secretary James Cleverly.
Mr Cleverly was part of the Conservative-led government which blocked the Scottish Government's controversial gender reforms.
The Government proposed removing the need for a diagnosis of gender dysphoria as a requirement for obtaining a gender recognition certificate – a process known as self identification.
The move was scuppered by then-Scottish secretary Alister Jack, who used Section 35 of the Scotland Act to block the legislation.
Mr Cleverly told attendees the move showed the 'importance of the union'.
'This issue was clearly spiralling out of control, badly out of control,' he said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Herald Scotland
2 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Defections to Reform smack of political opportunism
The party has also bled support in the Scottish Parliament when MSP Jamie Green joined the Liberal Democrats in April. Of course, this phenomenon is not limited to the Tories. In March 2021, SNP MPs Kenny MacAskill and Neale Hanvey followed former FM Alex Salmond to the newly-formed Alba Party. Ash Regan followed suit in 2023 after coming a distant third in the race to become Nicola Sturgeon's successor. Ash Regan is a high-profile defectee. (Image: PA) In some cases, the mental gymnastics required to swap one party for another are quite impressive. Former MP Lisa Cameron famously deserted the SNP for the Tories in October 2023, as the East Kilbride parliamentarian faced a staunch selection contest. Reform councillor Jamie McGuire serves as a recent example of this drastic ideological seesaw. Read more: The former Labour apparatchik worked as a Parliamentary Researcher for Paisley & Renfrewshire North MP Alison Taylor and was a past chair of Glasgow University's Labour club. He dramatically swapped sides in early June, announcing his defection as Nigel Farage visited Scotland ahead of the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election. McGuire's former colleagues have shared their shock at the defection. A fellow Glasgow University graduate who was on the committee of the Labour society alongside Jamie told The Herald that the defection came as a 'slap in the face'. 'I am quite shocked,' the source said. 'He was so deep within the Labour circles and organised some decent events too for the society. 'He got elected as a councillor and trained by the party to be a candidate so it does feel like a slap in the face. It is shocking.' Jamie McGuire is a former Labour councillor. (Image: Newsquest) The decision came as a surprise to another Glasgow University politics alumnus, who took classes alongside McGuire. The source said they thought the announcement was a joke at first. They told The Herald: 'I was bored scrolling on Reddit, then saw his picture in a Glasgow-related page with Reform background logos. I assumed some SNP cybernat made it up as a joke but when I found out it was real I was beyond floored. 'The guy was the biggest Labour party advocate I knew at university, I even spoke to him last year and he was talking to me about his excitement about what the Labour party was going to do in government and his excitement for the Scottish elections. It feels like a fever dream. 'He's one of the most lovely guys I've met and I'm really curious to hear more about his decision and hopes for the party's future.' Another person who knew McGuire at university said: 'I'll tell you this, it was coming. He was setting himself up to be a Labour MP. 'Clearly he sensed the way of the wind and jumped ship.' In a tweet that now appears to be deleted, McGuire shared a photo of himself alongside Jeremy Corbyn at an event he organised during COP26. The post reads: 'It was a surreal experience tonight to share a stage with Jeremy Corbyn for my GU Labour Club COP26 event. Thank you to the Corbyn Project for showing us that another future is possible.' Jeremy Corbyn was hosted at an event set up by McGuire. (Image: Other) McGuire also served as Secretary of Scottish Young Labour and Scottish Labour Students in recent years. The Renfrewshire councillor cancelled a scheduled interview with The Herald last week, and did not respond to subsequent requests for comment. However, speaking to the Local Democracy Service last week, McGuire pushed back against claims made by his former group leader on the council. Councillor Ian McMillian of Labour said: 'His politics have, shall we say, always been a bit fluid and, since being elected three years ago as a Labour councillor, he has at times struggled to be a team player.' McGuire retorted: 'I've always been a team player, I've always been in politics to try and make a difference. 'I wish everyone well. I've always thought it was about the community, that was the reason I got involved in politics. 'I've always tried my best and I don't think anyone could disagree with the fact I put 100 per cent in all the time.' He said he joined Reform because it was a 'genuine opportunity' to tackle 'deep structural issues' affecting the UK. Read more: McGuire's story is far from unique. Indeed, it feels as if defections are occurring with increasing regularity. Some of that is to be expected as new political parties come to the forefront. Yet, far too often, ideological consistency is abandoned for political opportunity. Where does the average voter stand amidst all of this? Is it fair that the people of Renfrew North, who elected a Labour councillor four years ago, are now represented by a member of Reform UK? Or what about the constituents of West Scotland, who elected Jamie Greene as a Tory, and now have a Lib Dem MSP? After each high-profile defection calls for by-elections abound; in our nation's newspapers, radio stations, and social media sites. And while the noble thing would be to defend one's seat, or at least to stand down, politics is ultimately about power. Fairness is not top of mind for most politicians. Yet, sooner or later; in 2026, 2027, or 2029, our happy band of defectors will face the voting public. And like Julius Caesar, now they have crossed the Rubicon, there is no going back.
Telegraph
2 hours ago
- Telegraph
Labour's 1970s employment rights bill could send Britain over the edge
Rachel Reeves made vast spending pledges last week in a bid to placate fellow ministers, Labour MPs and party activists and save her political skin. She made no effort whatsoever to explain how she will pay. Yes, this was the Chancellor's spending review. We will get more detail on taxation and borrowing, the other side of the Government's ledger, during her next annual Budget, expected in late October or early November. Given how borrowing has ramped up over recent months, though – with debt interest payments surging as gilt yields have soared – it's astonishing that Reeves said absolutely nothing to reassure financial markets during her House of Commons speech. Back in March 2024, the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) forecasted borrowing for the financial year from April 2024 to April 2025 of £87bn. After the first Labour budget in 14 years last October – during which Reeves increased borrowing and taxation by a combined £70bn, green-lighting hefty public sector pay deals, net zero projects and much else on her party's ideological wish-list – the year's borrowing forecast ballooned to £127.5bn. Spool forward to the March Spring Statement and estimated 2024-25 borrowing was up another £10bn, to £137.3bn. And by the time the financial year ended a month later, the total had surged again to £148.3bn, a rise in our national debt in a single year more than £60bn up on the forecast Labour inherited on entering government last July. Reeves claims endlessly to have 'discovered a £22bn black hole in the public finances left by the Tories' on taking office. This is fictitious nonsense, used by ministers to justify tax rises not mentioned in Labour's election manifesto. But even if you accept this rhetorical tosh, which I don't, the £60bn-plus rise in borrowing in 2024-25 alone is almost three times bigger. The more Reeves drones on about 'the black hole we inherited', as she did yet again at the top of her speech last Wednesday, the more she undermines her fast-diminishing credibility in the eyes of financial markets. That's yet another thing she simply can't afford. Before last October's budget, the 30-year gilt yield – the rate of interest charged by investors to lend the UK government long-term money – was about 4.35pc. Yields in recent weeks have moved in a range of 5.25-5.5pc, having been above the 4.85pc peak during the height of the 'Liz Truss mini-Budget crisis' for the whole of this year. Yes, sovereign bonds yields have risen in other highly-indebted Western nations since last autumn. But 30-year yields in France, Germany and Italy are all considerably lower and have gone up far less (by less than half a percentage point in each case). Plus, about a quarter of the UK's sovereign debt is index-linked, far more than other G7 economies, which makes us uniquely vulnerable, with debt-service costs spiralling rapidly upward as inflationary pressures rise. After what shadow chancellor Mel Stride rightly called a 'spend now, tax later' spending review, we're now in for 'a cruel summer of speculation'. Cash-strapped companies and households will now angst about yet more Labour tax rises in this autumn's Budget. The fine print of last week's Treasury documents shows Reeves's plans are predicated on council tax in England rising by 5pc every year during the rest of this Parliament. The only way the UK can avoid a really serious fiscal crisis is to get economic growth going on – with more consumption and investment driving tax receipts up and a larger economy then more able to shoulder our huge national debt stock. Yet the day after Reeves's statement came news the economy shrank 0.3pc during April – the first monthly drop in headline GDP for six months and the worst single month since October 2023. Labour's 25pc rise in employer national insurance contributions (NIC), implemented from April, has seriously hammered hiring. Provisional data shows payroll employment fell by a vast 109,000 in May alone, with employment having fallen every single month since this ill-judged NIC rise was announced last October. And now, just as we really need to get people back to work, to kick-start growth, Labour's employment rights bill is set to clear Parliament. Deeply counterproductive, this legislation takes the UK back to the 1970s by significantly increasing trade union influence, a sure-fire route to stagnation. Championed by 'Red Queen' Angela Rayner, the Deputy Prime Minister, this bill removes qualifying periods for sick pay, maternity pay and unfair dismissal, granting all of these from day one of employment. No wonder countless employer surveys point to fears of lawsuits and greater reluctance to take on more staff. The legislation repeals plenty of the trade union controls from the early-and mid-1980s onwards that rescued Britain from the dystopian and destructive industrial relations of my childhood. The 50pc threshold for strike ballots is set to go, along with vital minimum service levels during industrial action, handing ever more bargaining power to Labour's trade union paymasters. Creating new finger-pointing quangos to chide employers, and requirements for companies to implement endless 'equality action plans', there are also insidious 'opt out' clauses designed to maximise worker contributions to unions and therefore the Labour party, with scant disclosure. It is yet another example of how the Government is determined to replace enterprise, prosperity and opportunity with regulation, entitlement and state overreach. I'm amazed this ghastly legislation has attracted so little media attention. It must be vigorously opposed and called out by the leadership of both the Tories and Reform, the only two parties likely to acknowledge the dangers. Because unless the economy gets going, and the UK escapes this low-growth, high-borrowing, high-tax doom loop, we're heading for a serious fiscal crisis.
The Guardian
3 hours ago
- The Guardian
UK government rollout of Humphrey AI tool raises fears about reliance on big tech
The government's artificial intelligence (AI) tool known as Humphrey is based on models from OpenAI, Anthropic and Google, it can be revealed, raising questions about Whitehall's increasing reliance on big tech. Ministers have staked the future of civil service reform on rolling out AI across the public sector to improve efficiency, with all officials in England and Wales to receive training in the toolkit. However, it is understood the government does not have overarching commercial agreements with the big tech companies on AI and uses a pay-as-you-go model through its existing cloud contracts, allowing it to swap through tools as they improve and become competitive. Critics are concerned about the speed and scale of embedding AI from big tech into the heart of government, especially when there is huge public debate about the technology's use of copyrighted material. Ministers have been locked in a battle with critics in the House of Lords over whether AI is unfairly being trained on creative material without credit of compensation. Its data bill allowing copyrighted material to be used unless the rights holder opts out passed its final stage this week in a defeat for those fighting for further protections. The issue has caused a fierce backlash from the creative sector, with artists including Elton John, Tom Stoppard, Paul McCartney and Kate Bush throwing their weight behind a campaign to protect copyrighted material. A freedom of information request showed the government's Consult, Lex and Parlex tools designed to analyse consultations and legislative changes use base models from Open AI's GPT, while its Redbox tool, which helps civil servants with everyday tasks such as preparing briefs, uses Open AI GPT, Anthropic's Claude and Google Gemini. Ed Newton-Rex, the chief executive of Fairly Trained, who obtained the FoI and is campaigning against AI being trained on copyrighted material, said there was the potential for a conflict when the government was also thinking about how this sector should deal with copyright. He said: 'The government can't effectively regulate these companies if it is simultaneously baking them into its inner workings as rapidly as possible. These AI models are built via the unpaid exploitation of creatives' work. 'AI makes a ton of mistakes, so we should expect these mistakes to start showing up in the government's work. AI is so well known for 'hallucinating' – that is, getting things wrong – that I think the government should be keeping transparent records of Humphrey's mistakes, so that its continuing use can be periodically reevaluated.' Shami Chakrabarti, the Labour peer and civil liberties campaigner, also urged caution and to be mindful of biases and inaccuracies such as those seen in the Horizon computer system that led to the miscarriage of justice for post office operators. Whitehall sources said Humphrey tools all worked in different ways, but users could take different approaches to tackling 'hallucinations', or inaccuracy, and the government continually publishes evaluations about the accuracy of technology in trials. An AI playbook for government also sets out guidance to help officials make use of the technology quickly and offers advice on how to ensure people have control over decisions at the right stages. The costs of using AI in government are expected to grow as Humphrey is further rolled out but officials say prices of AI per-use in the industry have trended downwards, as models become more efficient. Whitehall sources said big projects such as the Scottish government's use of AI to analyse consultation responses had cost less than £50 and saved many hours of work. Using the government's AI Minute software to take notes for a one-hour meeting costs less than 50p and its early data shows that it saves officials an hour of admin each time. A spokesperson from the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology said: 'AI has immense potential to make public services more efficient by completing basic admin tasks, allowing experts to focus on the important work they are hired to deliver. 'Our use of this technology in no way limits our ability to regulate it, just as the NHS both procures medicines and robustly regulates them. 'Humphrey, our package of AI tools for civil servants, is built by AI experts in government – keeping costs low as we experiment with what works best.' When the Guardian asked ChatGPT what base models were used for the Humphrey AI toolkit and if Open AI was involved, it replied that the information was not available. At the time the tool was announced earlier this year, the government said its strategy for spending £23bn a year on technology contracts would be changed, boosting opportunities for smaller tech startups.
