Latest news with #GenderRecognitionBill
The Herald Scotland
5 days ago
- Politics
- The Herald Scotland
Have our MSPs got nothing better to talk about than toilets?
How long before we have an urgent question on the lack of paper clips in Mr Harvie's office? Jane Lax, Aberlour. • One may be forgiven for wondering why it's supposed to be "exclusionary", "transphobic" and a "breach of human rights" when employers or public organisations provide gender-neutral toilets on their premises. Of course it's not. Yet this idea lives in the minds of Scottish Greens MSP Patrick Harvie and 16 other MSPs (out of 129) who have signed a letter in protest of the Scottish Parliament Corporate Body's decision to clarify that, in line with the recent Supreme Court judgement, men's and women's toilets at Holyrood are defined as single-sex spaces with additional gender-neutral facilities provided for the needs of everyone. On behalf of Patrick Harvie, elected representatives then had to spend precious debating time on this topic. While this may seem trivial compared to bread-and-butter issues such as the cost of living, health or education, it does matter. Loos have become the latest battleground in the pushback, driven by some trans activists, against the Supreme Court's clarification that "men", "women" and "sex" are defined by biology in the UK Equality Act 2010. For them, it seems, provision of gender-neutral facilities alongside female and male ones isn't enough and the ultimate prize appears to be the general abolition of single-sex spaces. By forcing his loo debate on Holyrood Patrick Harvie, a fierce champion of this idea, has made sure that the topic stays in the public eye. Regina Erich, Stonehaven. Read more letters UK must restore dignity Andrew Learmonth asks why public bodies are waiting for the new code of practice on equality law from the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), before changing their policies on things like the use of toilets by trans people ("Why is government waiting for the EHRC after ruling?", The Herald, May 27). The answer is surely that both John Swinney and Keir Starmer were mistaken when they suggested that the recent Supreme Court judgement on this brought clarity. It has, so far, done nothing of the sort. On the one hand we have the EHRC suggesting that the judgement means that trans people will be barred from using facilities that match their gender identity. On the other hand, we have some very senior lawyers, including a former Supreme Court judge, disagreeing that that is what the judgement requires. And there is already legal action under way to challenge the EHRC's interpretation. If the EHRC's view is correct, however, two things are clear. Firstly, trans people's rights to privacy and safety will be seriously undermined – more so than in any other western European country. Cases about this will be taken through the courts, if necessary to the European Court of Human Rights. Secondly, the Supreme Court will have completely reversed the clear intention of the UK Parliament in passing the Gender Recognition Bill in 2004. The then government minister, David Lammy, and the opposition's Andrew Selous, explicitly agreed during the Commons debate on the bill that a gender recognition certificate would change a person's sex for the purposes of equality law (which includes the law governing the use of separate-sex services). The bill was passed on that basis. If the Supreme Court has decided the opposite, it has overturned the will of MPs, based on a detailed analysis of the wording of the legislation. That demonstrates that the law was, in the relevant parts, too loosely drafted to properly implement what was intended by government and Parliament. Equality law is reserved to Westminster, so the Scottish Parliament cannot fix this mess. If the EHRC is correct, the UK Government should act promptly to amend the legislation to restore the will of Parliament as agreed in 2004. Surely Keir Starmer's Government cannot intend that the UK's respect for equality and human rights should be so much poorer now than it was 21 years ago? Tim Hopkins, Edinburgh. Are the .04% more important? Following Nicola Sturgeon's recent statement in which she proposes the legalising of transgender rights to use ladies' toilets and changing facilities ("'Trans law may require a change,' says Sturgeon", The Herald, May 26), I wish to share the following facts and statistics. These are 2021figures: UK female population 35 million, an estimated 280,000 identify as transgender; 0.08% of female population. Scotland's female population of 2.9m, an estimated 19,900 identify as transgender; 0.07% of the female population. UK total population male and female 69m. These figures show the transgender population to be .04% of the UK – yet Ms Sturgeon and other politicians believe the transgender community has a status and influence, and therefore rights, higher than 99.96% of the UK population. Professor Tony Meehan, Glasgow. Farage not a true unionist Those of us who are "old lags" in Ukip Scotland remember the 2011 Scottish Parliamentary elections. Our slogan was "Sack the MSPs". We desired then, as now, the abolition of the Holyrood so-called parliament. Our national leader was a fellow called Nigel Farage and he enthusiastically embraced this message. Today of course Nigel has undergone a dramatic conversion and now presumably regards the so-called Scottish Government as a good thing. The Reform candidate in the forthcoming Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse Scottish by-election claims that he would not be standing for a parliament he does not believe in. That is exactly what Nigel and Ukip did from 1999 to 2019 as we stood for the European Parliament from which we wished to be disentangled. Nigel may have walked away from his firm unionist credentials but his legacy lives on as the true unionists in this election seek to resurrect the place of Scotland as an integral part of the United Kingdom governed by the House of Commons – the only Parliament. Donald MacKay, Blackwood. Nigel Farage (Image: Newsquest) Frigates not a valid comparison Stan Grodynski (Letters, May 27) in his own attempt at "whitabootery", intends to distract from the Scottish ferry scandal by trying to compare Glens Sannox and Rosa to cost overruns on the Type 26 Frigate contract. He unfortunately makes the rather basic mistake of not checking his facts first. The award of the Type 26 contract to BAe Systems was valued at £4.2 billion and is for extremely complex ships of 8,000 tonnes and with high levels of intricate technology. There have been cost overruns acknowledged of £233 million – equating to around 5% – with a delay of 12 months. By contrast, the Ferguson Marine ferries contract was valued at £97m, and is for two straightforward car ferries. Cost overruns amount to £650m to date – being 670%. The first ferry was delayed seven years and the second's date of active duty is not yet known; both have had their capacity cut due to design flaws, and the one that is running was planned on a scale that means she cannot fit her usual home port. Steph Johnson, Glasgow. Why should Israel surrender? What would Eric Melvin (Letters, May 29) have Israel do to defend itself against the Islamists bent on destroying it? Surrender? Cut Israel in half, hoping to placate the terrorists? Did we surrender to Germany in the Second World? No. We fought until the Nazis had enough and quit. Then we cut Germany in four, tried and hung their leaders and occupied it until we felt they had expunged the evil from their society. Only after the war did we send in aid. Israel was savagely attacked on October 7, 2023. On October 8, the Jew-haters swung into action. 40,000 dormant social media sites spewed antisemitic propaganda. Posters and flags were delivered to campuses all over the world. Hezbollah, Iran and Houthis fired into Israel. Zionism means Jews fight back. Mr Melvin should work to save the hostages, not their aggressors. Len Bennett, Ottawa, Canada.
Spectator
06-05-2025
- Politics
- Spectator
The SNP is remembering its populist roots
John Swinney will unveil his second programme for government in Holyrood today – the first minister of Scotland's equivalent of the King's Speech. He will promise measures to cut hospital waiting lists, address climate change, eliminate child poverty and, above all, promote economic growth. But what is more interesting than what is in today's programme is what has been left out of it. John Swinney has been quietly burying his predecessors' progressive policies. He would never use the word, but the First Minister is waving farewell to woke. He has already made it clear he will not resurrect Nicola Sturgeon's disastrous Gender Recognition Bill. This is the legislation, passed overwhelmingly by the Scottish Parliament in December 2022, which would have allowed 16-year-olds to change their legal sex by making a simple declaration.
Spectator
05-05-2025
- Politics
- Spectator
Ash Regan on the rise of Reform in Scotland, what is a woman and why ‘no-one resigns anymore'
In this special edition of Coffee House Shots, Lucy Dunn speaks to the Holyrood leader of the pro-independence Alba party, Ash Regan. Regan was formerly a member of the SNP and even ran to be the party's leader after Nicola Sturgeon resigned in 2023. She defected to the late Alex Salmond's Alba party 18 months ago and ran for party leader after his death. On the podcast, she talks to Lucy about the difference between Alba and the SNP, the threat of Reform in Scotland, the 'performative' nature of Scottish politics, the Supreme Court ruling over what is a woman, and why she was right to resign over the Gender Recognition Bill.
Telegraph
16-04-2025
- Politics
- Telegraph
Common sense wins the day on definition of a woman
It's pretty straightforward to decide who comes out best from the Supreme Court's unanimous verdict on, believe it or not, 'what is a woman?' Obviously, and certainly in my opinion, the vast majority of women everywhere will reckon they do and, of course, so will the four women who took their fight all the way to the UK's highest court and won. In terms of those who sprinkled stardust of their campaign, JK Rowling was a brilliant advocate for the cause and seemingly content to accept all the slings and arrows from her opponents, who included, incredibly, Nicola Sturgeon, then the first minister of Scotland. And let's not forget Joanna Cherry, an indefatigable legal eagle who never for a second retreated from her principled opposition to the changes her own party was seeking to make even if it did lead to bitter denunciations from former colleagues. Politically, of course, it's the SNP that deserves all the brickbats for seeking to foist on Scotland and indeed the rest of the UK an alien form of public behaviour that would have allowed trans women, who remained biological males, access to hitherto female only facilities – such as toilets and changing rooms. But right at the top of the list of victors should go good old-fashioned common sense. That's what Wednesday's learned judgement delivered. It is a ridiculous situation that should never have reached the highest court in the land: it shouldn't have been judges deciding what is or isn't a woman. Biology and nature, combined with common sense should have made that abundantly clear to everyone. As far as politics is concerned, there is no doubt that the Scottish Tories win hands down, at least in relation to the attempted legislation that ultimately took the trans issue all the way to the Supreme Court. This involved – who else? – Ms Sturgeon and her ill-fated and badly thought out Gender Recognition Bill for which only three Tory MSPs voted and one of them has subsequently defected to the Lib Dems. But the former first minister didn't give up when that measure was blocked by the UK government and her administration then 'persuaded' the Scottish courts that transgender people with a gender recognition certificate were entitled to the same sex-based protections as biological women. That was the verdict that the Supreme Court overturned thanks to the persistence of the For Women Scotland activists. There is no ambiguity in the mind of Russell Findlay, the Scottish Tory leader. In his reaction to the verdict he said that John Swinney, the First Minister, 'now needs to respect women's rights and get rid of the dangerous gender policies which have become embedded in Scotland's public institutions'. Meanwhile, for his part, Mr Swinney said his Government accepted the Supreme Court's decision, saying it provided 'clarity' but added that 'protecting the rights of all' would continue to underpin its actions. It is difficult to see from this distance what effect Wednesday's decision will have on political popularity in Scotland. The latest opinion poll, which aimed to judge where the parties stand as they begin their preparations for the next Scottish Parliament election, now just over 12 months away, delivered very bad news for Unionists. It suggested that those parties which support Scottish independence, which include Alba and the Scottish Greens, as well as the SNP, stand to gain an overall majority of 29 over the Tories, Labour, Lib Dems and Reform in Holyrood – more than enough, they'll claim, for another referendum on breaking up the UK. However, we won't have to wait until next May to test the parties' strengths. There is to be a by-election in Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse on June 5, following the death of Christina McKelvie, a popular SNP minister who had a 4,500 majority over Labour at the last Holyrood election. The SNP will be favourites again, but with Reform on the list, and with Nigel Farage, the party leader, announcing that he'll be campaigning, there is set to be a lot of drama. The Tories have no chance of winning but will be doing their utmost to at least top the Reform candidate's vote, which is a tall order. Labour have selected a strong local candidate in Davy Russell but can't really mount an all out attack on the SNP over their trans policies as most of Scottish Labour's MSPs voted for Sturgeon's controversial Bill. We're told that wiser counsels have now prevailed in Labour's ranks but what the Scottish party really needs is a firm statement and guidance from Sir Keir Starmer over what Labour's policy is on the trans issue. Is that forthcoming?
Yahoo
16-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Common sense wins the day on the definition of a woman
It's pretty straightforward to decide who comes out best from the Supreme Court's unanimous verdict on, believe it or not, 'what is a woman?'.Obviously and certainly in my opinion the vast majority of women everywhere will reckon they do and, of course, so will the four women who took their fight all the way to the UK's highest court and won. In terms of those who sprinkled stardust of their campaign JK Rowling was a brilliant advocate for the cause and seemingly content to accept all the slings and arrows from her opponents, who included, incredibly, Nicola Sturgeon, the then first minister of Scotland. And let's not forget Joanna Cherry, an indefatigable legal eagle who never for a second retreated from her principled opposition to the changes her own party was seeking to make even if it did lead to bitter denunciations from former colleagues. Politically, of course, it's the SNP that deserves all the brickbats for seeking to foist on Scotland and indeed the rest of the UK an alien form of public behaviour that would have allowed trans women, who remained biological males, access to hitherto female only facilities – such as toilets and changing rooms. But right at the top of the list of victors should go good old-fashioned common sense. That's what Wednesday's learned judgement delivered. It is a ridiculous situation that should never have reached the highest court in the land: it shouldn't have been judges deciding what is or isn't a woman. Biology and nature, combined with common sense should have made that abundantly clear to everyone. As far as politics is concerned, there is no doubt that the Scottish Tories win hands down, at least in relation to the attempted legislation that ultimately took the trans issue all the way to the Supreme Court. This involved – who else? – Ms Sturgeon and her ill-fated and badly thought out Gender Recognition Bill for which only three Tory MSPs voted and one of them has subsequently defected to the Lib Dems. But the former first minister didn't give up when that measure was blocked by the UK government and her administration then 'persuaded' the Scottish courts that transgender people with a gender recognition certificate were entitled to the same sex-based protections as biological women. That was the verdict that the Supreme Court overturned thanks to the persistence of the For Women Scotland activists. There is no ambiguity in the mind of Russell Findlay, the Scottish Tory leader. In his reaction to the verdict he said that First Minister John Swinney 'now needs to respect women's rights and get rid of the dangerous gender policies which have become embedded in Scotland's public institutions'. Meanwhile, for his part Mr Swinney said his Government accepted the Supreme Court's decision, saying it provided 'clarity' but added that 'protecting the rights of all' would continue to underpin its actions. It is difficult to see from this distance what effect Wednesday's decision will have on political popularity in Scotland. The latest opinion poll, which aimed to judge where the parties stand as they begin their preparations for the next Scottish Parliament election, now just over 12 months away, delivered very bad news for Unionists. It suggested that those parties which support Scottish independence, which include Alba and the Scottish Greens, as well as the SNP, stand to gain an overall majority of 29 over the Tories, Labour, Lib Dems and Reform in Holyrood – more than enough, they'll claim, for another referendum on breaking up the UK. However, we won't have to wait until next May to test the parties' strengths. There is to be a by-election in Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse on June 5, following the death of popular Christina McKelvie, a popular SNP minister who had a 4,500 majority over Labour at the last Holyrood election. The SNP will be favourites again, but with Reform on the list and with Nigel Farage, the party leader, announcing that he'll be campaigning, there is set to be a lot of drama. The Tories have no chance of winning but will be doing their utmost to at least top the Reform candidate's vote, a tall order. Labour have selected a strong local candidate in Davy Russell but can't really mount an all out attack on the SNP over their trans policies as most of Scottish Labour's MSPs voted for Sturgeon's controversial Bill. We're told that wiser counsels have now prevailed in Labour's ranks but what the Scottish party really needs is a firm statement and guidance from Sir Keir Starmer over what Labour's policy is on the trans issue. Is that forthcoming? Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
