Latest news with #GenderRecognitionReform
Scotsman
18-05-2025
- Politics
- Scotsman
Second independence referendum could happen if support becomes 'overwhelming', Michael Gove says
The former minister suggested it would be down to what happened with public services Sign up to our Politics newsletter Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... A second independence referendum could happen if support becomes 'overwhelming', Michael Gove has said. The former Tory minister insisted he didn't think another referendum was necessary, but suggested the UK Government may have to change its approach if support for a second vote grew. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Appearing on the BBC Scotland's Sunday Show, Mr Gove also defended the decision by then-Scottish Secretary Alister Jack to block Scotland's gender reforms. He said: "I think if there's an overwhelming desire on the part of the Scottish people for one then we'd have to review the situation then. "It's not for me, ultimately it's for the Westminster Government to decide that. "They've got the daily responsibilities." Mr Gove denied that this was anti-democratic and insisted that Scotland had "more important" issues to deal with. He argued any second independence vote was now linked to the SNP's ability to improve public services. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad He said: "If, for the sake of argument, the SNP make all of those decisions in government in a way that gives people confidence in them then we might be in a different position [on a second referendum]". Mr Gove also discussed the decision by the UK Government to use a Section 35 order to block the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill, the bill that aimed to simplify the process for transgender people in Scotland to change their legal gender. Soon to join the House of Lords as Lord Gove of Torry, Mr Gove had chaired the Cabinet sub-committee that took the decision to block the Holyrood Bill. Former Scotland secretary Alister Jack. Picture: Andy Buchanan/AFP via Getty Images He said: "Alister Jack was ultimately the individual who had to take that decision and give effect to it. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad "I think it was absolutely the right decision, and I think it's been vindicated by subsequent events." 'Defending women's rights, and defending the principle that biological sex is the basis on deciding who is a man and who is a woman, I think that was absolutely the right thing to do. "It's there in the Scotland Act because at the time that devolution was legislated for it was clear that there needed to be a failsafe power in order to ensure that the overall rights of everyone in the United Kingdom could be protected."
The Herald Scotland
12-05-2025
- Politics
- The Herald Scotland
Former Scottish Secretary Alister Jack takes seat in Lords
When sworn in, Lord Jack said: 'I, Alister, Lord Jack of Courance, swear by Almighty God that I will bear faithful and true allegiance to His Majesty King Charles, his heirs and successors, according to law, so help me God.' READ MORE Following the publication of the honours list, Jack said: 'When I stepped down as an MP at last year's General Election, I was looking forward to new challenges. This opportunity was unexpected, but I welcome the chance to use this platform to speak up on issues I am passionate about. 'Whether championing our rural economy or standing up for Scotland's vital role at the heart of the United Kingdom, I will remain a strong voice for Scotland's interests in the House of Lords.' Mr Sunak's citation said the Lockerbie Baron had 'worked to ensure that devolution worked better for the people of Scotland and the United Kingdom'. During his time in office, Lord Jack triggered a Section 35 order to block the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill from receiving Royal Assent. It was the first time the UK Government had used the power to veto devolved legislation. He said he blocked the legislation because it would have had adverse effects on UK-wide equalities law. An attempt by the Scottish Government to have the decision reversed in the courts was unsuccessful. The enoblement was criticised by Scottish Green MSP Maggie Chapman. She said: 'There are few institutions as outdated and discredited as the House of Lords. It is a ridiculous and anti-democratic relic that any self-respecting politician should be embarrassed to be part of. 'Alister Jack represents a party that Scotland has rejected time and again, yet he has been put in this lucrative and powerful position for the rest of his life. What kind of democracy is that?" However, former Scottish Tory leader Douglas Ross congratulated his old colleague. He tweeted: "Congratulations to Alister Jack, now Lord Jack of Courance, on his introduction to the House of Lords today. "I have no doubt he will continue to serve Scotland well from his new position just as he did during his time in the House of Commons and in Cabinet."
Scotsman
12-05-2025
- Politics
- Scotsman
Readers' Letters: Swinney's position on assisted dying is perplexing
The First Minister's position on assisted dying confuses a reader Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... Scotsman readers will have their own views on assisted dying. This is understandable. What is perplexing is that John Swinney and many others who voted for the Gender Recognition Reform legislation would be against allowing assisted dying. They proposed changes in the law that would allow 16-year-olds, with limited life experience and in the throes of adolescent uncertainty, to choose potentially irreversible life changing surgery and long-term medication. This to safeguard their wellbeing and mental health. The Scottish Government even funded groups that sought to make this process easier and proposed legislation to outlaw 'conversion therapy', restricting the ability of parents and others to ensure that the young person fully understood the implication of their choice and being 'persuaded out of it'. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad If that was reasonable to Swinney and others, then logic would suggest that, for example, a 70-year-old with a lifetime of experience should be able to decide when their own circumstances and wellbeing are unbearable and choose to opt out of their limited remaining years. The law should allow those who still have their full faculties to make that choice and assume that they will not be 'persuaded into it'. First Minister John Swinney has come out against the Assisted Dying Bill (Picture: Jeff J Mitchell) To this end, perhaps the present 'advance directive' and 'Lasting Power of Attorney' could be extended to include the circumstances in which they would choose assisted dying so that should they lose their cognitive ability their wishes would be respected. Mark Openshaw, Aberdeen Better future If the cause of Scottish independence is as much of a busted flush ('tired old, washed up priority of taking Scotland out of the UK') as unionist correspondent Jill Stephenson maintains (Letters, 10 May), why does she continue to bombard letters pages with tediously negative outpourings decrying it? In other words, if the argument is won, why keep making it? It is not so long ago that what is now Ireland was being told it could not possibly stand on its own two feet and survive economically. As we all know, Ireland now has a thriving economy and with our extensive natural and renewable resources there is no reason whatsoever why Scotland could not emulate this! Ms Stephenson refers to child poverty and the NHS as being problem areas in Scotland. There is no doubt the NHS, largely due to years of Westminster underfunding, is struggling. Despite this, NHS Scotland comfortably holds its own in comparison with NHS England and Wales. As recently as March it was announced that the NHS in England was facing a £6.6 billion shortfall while chief executive Sir Jim Mackey expressed concern over 'staff being desensitised to poor care such as elderly people facing long waits on trolleys in A&E departments'. As far as child poverty is concerned there is obviously much still to be done but (as I am sure Ms Stephenson is aware ) the rate of poverty is lower here than in the rest of the UK due to the Scottish Child Payment. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad The Union is broken and the rightwards drift and strong support for Reform in England alarming. Jill Stephenson is ignoring reality if she thinks Nigel Farage is unlikely to be the next UK Prime Minister. The only way forward for Scotland and the only way to guarantee a better future for our grandchildren is independence – the sooner the better! Alan Woodcock, Dundee Devil in detail As the dust begins to settle following the UK's apparent 'landmark' trade deal with India, the devil is, as always in such matters, in the detail. The UK Government estimates that annual economic output will be a stunning 0.1 per cent higher by 2040 than it would have been without the India trade deal. In contrast, the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) noted in spring 2023 that Brexit's impact in the long run reduces our overall output by around 4 per cent compared with what we would have had we remained in the EU. The amount gained by the 'landmark' India deal is therefore one-fortieth of the amount lost due to Brexit. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Prime Minister Keir Starmer has described the Indian trade deal as a 'pragmatic' approach to global trade. Such an approach would however involve the UK Government restoring frictionless trade with the UK's largest trading partner, the European Union. If the UK Government were looking to deliver a 'pragmatic' approach on the economic front, Sir Keir would be looking to get the UK back into the European single market as soon as possible. This would be far more productive than trying to deliver trade deals with far-off countries and deliver immensely higher economic benefits than the paltry 0.1 per cent generated by the India trade deal. Alex Orr, Edinburgh Shameful acts I write as a member of Friends of Israel but not of their present Prime Minister. Benjamin Netanyahu seems to treat all Palestinians as sub-human beings rather as Hitler treated the Jews. He should hang his head in shame. His predecessor came close to establishing a Palestinian state next door. He should return to that endeavour. David Steel, Selkirk, Scottish Borders Hot takes Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad I know Andrew Gray doesn't believe that climate warming is real, but he cannot be allowed to get away with inventing his own facts. The maximum temperatures he quotes (Letters, 9 May) are nonsense. In fact, the progressively maximum temperatures recorded in the UK from 1900-2025 are 36.6C in 1911, 37.1C in 1990, 38.5C in 2003, 38.7C in 2019 and 40.3C in 2022. The most worrying feature of this pattern is that the curve is exponential, trending very sharply upwards in the last 35 years. It bodes extremely badly for the whole of mankind. Barry Hughes, Edinburgh Write to The Scotsman
Scotsman
08-05-2025
- Politics
- Scotsman
Respect is one-way street for Sturgeon
I know I won't be alone in being both unsurprised but dismayed by former first minister Nicola Sturgeon's refusal to apologise for her role in making the gender debate one of the most toxic and divisive since the independence referendum. Sign up to our daily newsletter Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to Edinburgh News, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... Speaking this week, she showed not one iota of contrition for the way she ramped up this issue and denigrated the legitimate fears of women who saw safe single-sex spaces and services threatened by ideologues who failed to accept than a man cannot be accepted as a woman just because he says he is. Former First Minister Nicola Sturgeon She and others like her insisted it was all transphobic scaremongering, until a rapist was sent to a women's prison under cover of a blonde wig and a pink anorak. 'I recognise the different views on this, I've always recognised the different views on this, but I think it's important that respect runs in both directions,' she said, conveniently forgetting that her idea of respect was to use the Scottish Parliament to attack opponents of her Gender Recognition Reform plan as bigots. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad For Ms Sturgeon it seems respect is indeed a one-way street, accorded to people who agree with her, but not to those who don't. To Ms Sturgeon, respect means not condemning aggressive protestors who abused and spat at me and my colleagues on our way into a meeting, and who with her trademark snarky half-snigger told the BBC's Laura Kuenssberg how much she detested Conservatives. R-E-S-P-E-C-T? She couldn't spell it, never mind sing it. Sue Webber is a Scottish Conservative MSP for Lothian
Yahoo
06-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Sturgeon warns trans lives could become ‘unliveable' after Supreme Court ruling
Nicola Sturgeon has warned that trans lives could become 'unliveable' following the Supreme Court judgment on the definition of a woman. The former Scottish first minister said she was concerned about how the landmark ruling has been interpreted. But she added that it was not 'inevitable' that the court ruling would make trans lives 'impossibly difficult'. Last month, the UK's highest court ruled the terms 'woman' and 'sex' in the 2010 Equality Act 'refer to a biological woman and biological sex'. The Scottish Government lost a court case against For Women Scotland at the Supreme Court last month (Aaron Chown/PA) The case was brought against the Scottish Government by the campaign group For Women Scotland. Speaking to reporters at the Scottish Parliament on Tuesday, Ms Sturgeon said she would back a further change in the law to improve trans rights, if new guidance put trans people at risk. ADVERTISEMENT The former SNP leader's government had previously attempted to push through the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill in 2023, which was voted through by MSPs. But the legislation was revoked by the then Conservative government, which said it violated the 2010 Equality Act – the law the Supreme Court ruled on in April. Ms Sturgeon also rejected calls for her to apologise to critics of gender self-ID, saying she 'fundamentally and respectfully disagreed' with such calls. She said: 'The Supreme Court judgment, by definition, is the law of the land. 'The Supreme Court is the highest judicial authority in the country, so there is no gainsaying that. 'The question for me, and I think for a lot of people, is how that is now translated into practice, can that be done in a way that, of course, protects women, but also allows trans people to live their lives with dignity and in a safe and accepted way. ADVERTISEMENT 'I think that remains to be seen.' Ms Sturgeon said it was new guidance by the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) that could put trans people at risk. Following the court ruling, the EHRC published interim guidance that said 'trans women (biological men) should not be permitted to use the women's facilities' in places like hospitals, shops and restaurants. Ms Sturgeon said: 'I would be very concerned if that interim guidance became the final guidance and I hope that is not the case because I think that potentially makes the lives of trans people almost unliveable. 'The EHRC is a statutory body and I respect the role they've got. I'm not going to comment at this stage on where they might go. 'I'm making a general comment that I don't think it's inevitable that we go from the Supreme Court judgment to a situation where trans lives become impossibly difficult – nor do I believe that's what a majority of people want the situation to be.' Nicola Sturgeon expressed concerns about trans rights following interim guidance by the UK's equalities watchdog (Lesley Martin/PA) Asked by reporters if she would support a further change to the law to improve trans rights, Ms Sturgeon said she would. ADVERTISEMENT She warned that the court ruling was not a 'moral judgment' and said it was not up to courts to make a statement on what the law could be. 'That's not the role of any court,' she said. 'That's the role of politicians and governments. 'I've spent my life campaigning for the protection and the enhancement of women's rights, and I bow to nobody on that, but I also think it's really important that the tiny, tiny number of people who are trans in this country get to live with dignity and in a way, that they feel safe and accepted in society for who they are. 'I don't believe. I've never believed, and I never will believe, that those two things are inevitably in tension.' The Glasgow Southside MSP said it appeared to her that 'a lot of the most vocal commentators on this haven't read the judgment, having read it', before adding that there was a 'danger' that certain interpretations could put trans people at risk. ADVERTISEMENT 'If that is the case, then yes, it would be, my view that the law as it stands, needs to be looked at,' she said. Joanna Cherry criticised Nicola Sturgeon for her remarks in Holyrood (Jane Barlow/PA) Former SNP MSP Joanna Cherry, a critic of gender self-ID, said Ms Sturgeon's claims that trans lives could be 'unliveable' were 'the sort of fatuous hyperbole that she has indulged in in relation to these issues from the outset and it is deeply irresponsible for any politician to so misrepresent the judgment'. Scottish Tory MSP Rachael Hamilton added: 'Nicola Sturgeon betrayed women and divided Scotland with her reckless gender self-ID policy, yet she still can't bring herself to apologise. 'For years she arrogantly dismissed the concerns of women and girls that their rights and safety were being sacrificed, as she parroted the views of extremist gender activists and ensured they were adopted across Scotland's public sector. 'Gender self-ID was always nonsense – and now the Supreme Court has declared it unlawful too. 'Nicola Sturgeon needs to hold her hands up and say sorry to the women of Scotland. But she and the SNP never admit to their mistakes or accept accountability when they get things badly wrong.'
