Latest news with #GenderRecognitionReformBill
Scotsman
31-05-2025
- Politics
- Scotsman
Why thousands of Scots support Reform (and it's not because they're racist)
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... There have been many moments of parliamentary pantomime in Holyrood since 1999. Only two days ago, a growling Douglas Ross MSP was thrown out of the chamber for talking over John Swinney at the weekly session of First Minister's Questions. And who can forget the sight of women's rights campaigner Elaine Miller who, from her vantage point in the public gallery, lifted her skirt to expose her merkin to show her disgust at the MSPs' decision to pass the Gender Recognition Reform Bill? Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad By Elaine's admittedly high standards – she is a part-time stand-up comic after all – Wednesday's urgent question by Patrick Harvie was pretty tame. There were no gasps of horror as the co-leader of the Scottish Greens got to his feet, at least none that were audible. Scottish Green MSPs Patrick Harvie and Lorna Slater had urgent concerns about the Scottish Parliament's 'facilities' this week (Picture: Jeff J Mitchell) | Getty Images 'Extremist fringe' During the 15-minute debate that ensued, no MSP or disgruntled observer exposed bare flesh. No voices were raised in anger. No one was banished from the chamber. But it was a farce all the same, because Harvie's coy yet 'urgent' question was about the use of the parliament's 'facilities' by MSPs and staff. For facilities, read toilets. His concern centred round a recent edict by the parliament's Corporate Body which declared that, for the foreseeable future, 'facilities' designated as male or female will be based on 'biological sex'. There will also be additional gender-neutral 'facilities' for those MSPs, staff and public who identify as transgender or non-binary. A sensible move one might think, following the recent Supreme Court ruling on the definition of a woman. But Harvie was having none of it, getting up on his high horse to compare the Corporate Body – made up of the Presiding Officer and four MSPs, including his Scottish Green colleague Maggie Chapman – to the 'extremist fringe of the United States Republican Party'. A tad hyperbolic, even for him. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad A handful of equally outraged MSPs chipped in, with Alex-Cole Hamilton, leader of the Lib Dems no less, demanding that no one should be asked to show their birth certificate before spending a penny. Much to my surprise, Lorna Slater, a former government minister, revealed there is a lively internet conspiracy that she is a trans woman and asked if she will require a medical examination prior to using a toilet. Education, health, cost of living Veteran MSP Christine Grahame, who was responding on behalf of the Corporate Body, kept her cool in the face of such daft questions, but an exasperated Russell Findlay took to his feet to express his impatience about this 'farcical waste of time'. The Tory leader said: 'The people of Scotland expect politicians to focus on what matters – rising household bills, their children's education, getting a general practitioner appointment, fixing the roads and keeping communities safe, yet the priority for out-of-touch SNP, Labour, Lib Dem and Green MSPs is an urgent debate about the Holyrood toilets.' If the people of Scotland had been watching Scottish Parliament TV instead of getting on with their lives, you might have heard a resounding cheer across the country at Findlay's intervention. Harvie's urgent question may have only taken up 15 minutes of parliamentary time, but it was a telling snapshot of Scotland's political class which exposed the gulf between them and the rest of us. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad The cultural divide between MSPs with their lanyards and pet causes and voters struggling to cope with the economic and social upheaval of the last decade could not be more stark than it was on Wednesday. While MSPs are fretting about where they should pee, we are worrying about whether our granny will get the social care she needs or if our children will get the education they deserve. Little wonder that Nigel Farage and his Reform party have spooked every political leader from John Swinney to Keir Starmer. Farage's popular rhetoric, cynical though it is, appeals to an electorate that is disillusioned with smug politicians so immersed in their private, elitist world that they are blind to what is happening in the real one. 'Litany of failures' The majority of people who will vote Reform at Thursday's Hamilton by-election are not racists, as some would have us believe. Most will not even have noticed Reform's despicable campaign ad, which crudely argued that the Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar will 'prioritise' Pakistani people. As former Labour MP Tom Harris argued in a newspaper column earlier this week, most voters are 'simply sick of the litany of failures and disappointments which have been served up by successive governments…' He went on: 'Voters don't support Reform because of their policies; they support Reform because it is not one of the old parties.' Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Scotland's leading election guru, Sir John Curtice, doesn't think that Reform will win. He was reported this week as saying that while it's not impossible, it would be a 'spectacular' result if they managed to pull it off. 'I think even coming second would be quite an achievement,' he said. But he pointed out that Scotland is a different world to the one 12 months ago that saw Scottish Labour pick up 37 seats at the general election. And recent polls suggest that Reform will be the second biggest party at Holyrood after the 2026 election, with 20 per cent of the popular vote. Nearly 60 years ago, another Hamilton by-election heralded a new era in Scottish politics, when Winnie Ewing became only the second SNP MP to win a seat at Westminster. You can trace a clear path from her legendary 1967 victory to the 2014 referendum.
Scotsman
26-05-2025
- Politics
- Scotsman
Why Nigel Farage's journey to becoming Scotland's saviour may start in Hamilton next week
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... Is John Swinney really the safe pair of hands that his coterie make him out to be? Has he really steadied the sinking SNP ship or is it still listing badly, floating aimlessly without an engine or rudder in a sea of public despair? Can Labour's Anas Sarwar convince the Scottish public he should be the next First Minister? Or does he represent not much more than Swinney without the nationalism, offering little real change from the uber-liberal collectivism Holyrood has championed as its reason for being? Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Or has Keir Starmer defined Labour as peddlers of false hope, offering seemingly seductive soundbites as policies – only to break the people's trust by taking unexpected contradictory if not deceitful decisions? And whisper it, could Nigel Farage actually shock the cosy collectivist consensus of Scotland's MacChattering classes by providing a resonating voice to the heartfelt fears and deep concerns of ordinary Scots worried about the state of their country? Nigel Farage aims not be a hammer of the Scots, but their salvation (Picture: Chris J Ratcliffe) | Getty Images The Scottish Parliament by-election for Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse on June 5 is likely to provide some pointers to what we might expect in next year's elections. Hamilton is famous as the constituency where the SNP won a 1967 Westminster by-election – could it repeat the occasion and show both the SNP and Labour have lost the trust of the Scottish people? The idea Swinney represents something a change of direction for the SNP is absurd. It was he who led his party to rejection twice between 2000-2004 over 20 years ago. It was he who, as Education Secretary, presided over a marked decline in standards of attainment. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad It was Swinney who was deputy to Nicola Sturgeon and remained a party cheerleader as Humza Yousaf brought open ridicule on the SNP. It was Swinney who backed all those failed attempts to have another independence referendum, Swinney who supported the highly divisive Gender Recognition Reform Bill that undermined women's rights and Swinney who stands for the higher taxes that drive people to work outside Scotland (including many of his own civil servants). Swinney is no safe pair of hands; his default judgment has been to defend the many calamities caused by SNP incompetence and arrogance, and putting independence before everything else. And his poor decision-making continues. If Swinney thought the way to demonise Reform UK was to hold a 'summit' at the taxpayers' expense then any prudent judgment he may have had has completely deserted him. Why spend £10,213 – including £4,000 on the hire of Merchants House of Glasgow, £4,000 on audio-visual and £1,000 on catering and drinks – when there are parliamentary or government rooms available to the First Minister? Was the use of publicly owned facilities considered ultra vires for such politicking? If so, why did Swinney as the host, or the other parties involved not pick up the tab for the expense? As if to endorse the idea that Sarwar's judgment is no better than Swinney's, he attended that Punch and Judy summit but now faces the likely ignominy of his Labour nominee for Hamilton coming behind the Reform UK and SNP candidates. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad As an alternative to Swinney, Sarwar presents himself as representative of change – but his top brass in London, be it Starmer or Chancellor Rachel Reeves, have done everything in their power to dissuade the Scottish people of this claim. Over the last ten months, Starmer's government has raised taxes on working people and removed the winter fuel allowance from ten million pensioners when it promised explicitly not to introduce either of those measures. After campaigning previously in support of Waspi women (including her mother), the Chancellor announced there would be no funds provided to compensate them. The Starmer government said it would reset the EU relationship but has in fact surrendered our sovereignty to make our own tighter laws on animal welfare. It's offering to subsidise the university education of the German middle classes; continue the free-for-all enjoyed by French boats in our fishing grounds; and make it possible for Bulgarian youths to forego their minimum wage of £3 per hour in return for £12 an hour in the UK. Meanwhile he has signed over the Chagos islands to Mauritius and will pay them up to £30bn for the privilege. It does not matter that Sarwar might be opposed to some or all of those decisions, his problem is Labour has shown that, when in power, it is prepared without shame to ditch campaign promises and abandon its electors. After witnessing the behaviour of Labour ministers under Starmer why should Sarwar – who even supported many of the policies of Sturgeon and Yousaf as well as Swinney – be believed as an agent of change? Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Being a little more competent without doing things differently is not going to move the dials at Holyrood, or in our schools and hospitals or make ScotRail run on time. No wonder then that Scots are warming to the messages being put out by Reform UK. Its pledges to stop net zero defenestrating our remaining industries, to drill baby drill, to take control of our borders away from the European Court of Human Rights, to restore the winter fuel allowance, to end the two-child benefits cap, to revive our coastal fisheries, and to defend our sovereign law-making in preference to EU technocrats throwing grit in the gears of prosperity are proving popular over the stale porridge offered by Holyrood and Farage is rated as more likely to deliver on his word. Farage does not threaten to be a hammer of the Scots, he aims to be the salvation of the Scots, releasing the country from its torpor and needless division. A good result for his party at Hamilton could yet change the direction of Holyrood, delivering it from the disappointment and embarrassment it has become for far too many.
Yahoo
07-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Nicola Sturgeon fears Supreme Court ruling could make life ‘unliveable' for trans people
Former first minister of Scotland, Nicola Sturgeon has spoken out against the recent Supreme Court ruling which determined that the words 'woman' and 'sex' refer only to 'biological women' in the context of the Equality Act 2010. Sturgeon, who is a longterm supporter of trans rights and was famously a proponent for Scotland's Gender Recognition Reform Bill, spoke to press about the recent court ruling for the first time yesterday. In particular Sturgeon raised concern over the interim guidance issued by the Equality and Human Rights Commission. 🚨 It's easy to stand up for minorities when it's popular. Starmer & Streeting both did that. To stand up for them when they're under attack, that takes a spine. 'We are at risk of making the lives of trans people almost unliveable.' – Nicola Sturgeon — Politics For You (@PoliticoForYou) May 6, 2025 'The question for me, and I think for a lot of people, is how that is now translated into practice,' she said. '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,' Sturgeon queried. 'I think that remains to be seen.' 'I think some of the early indications would raise concerns in my mind that we are at risk of making the lives of trans people almost unliveable and I don't think the majority of people in the country would want to see that.' The former SNP leader also took pause to note that she believes the primary threat to women is men. 'It certainly doesn't make a single woman any safer to do that because the threat to women, as I think we all know, comes from predatory and abusive men.' 'I will never apologise for trying to make life better for one of the most stigmatised, discriminated against sections of our society' – Nicola Sturgeon Sturgeon's comments echo the sentiments of statements she made earlier this year in which she predicted society will 'feel a sense of collective shame at the way in which trans people have been vilified in our society.' 'So I will never apologise for trying to make life better for one of the most stigmatised, discriminated against sections of our society,' the politician continued in March. Sturgeon was criticised for her most recent comments by Scottish Conservative deputy leader Rachael Hamilton who said: 'Nicola Sturgeon betrayed women and divided Scotland with her reckless gender self-ID policy, yet she still can't bring herself to apologise.' 'Nicola Sturgeon needs to hold her hands up and say sorry to the women of Scotland,' she added, as per the BBC. The post Nicola Sturgeon fears Supreme Court ruling could make life 'unliveable' for trans people appeared first on Attitude.
The National
06-05-2025
- Politics
- The National
Joanna Cherry slates Nicola Sturgeon response to Supreme Court ruling
The top court's ruling was seen as a major defeat for the trans rights movement – and the former SNP first minister broke her silence on the issue on Monday. Sturgeon said the judgment, which said women were defined in law by biology and which has triggered a roll-back in trans rights, could make trans people's lives 'unliveable'. Cherry, one of the former FM's fiercest critics within the SNP, accused Sturgeon of 'fatuous hyperbole'. She said 'To say that The Supreme Court judgment means we are 'at risk of making the lives of trans people almost unliveable' is 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.' Nicola Sturgeon reacts to UK Supreme Court judgement on the definition of a woman. Warns equalities watchdog guidance could make trans lives 'unliveable'. — Craig Meighan (@craigymeighan) May 6, 2025 The former SNP MP, who lost her seat at last year's General Election, also claimed Sturgeon was trying to 'rewrite history' by saying that all sides of the debate had been listened to when drawing up controversial trans rights laws, which have since been shelved. The SNP's Gender Recognition Reform Bill, which sought to make the process of getting a Gender Recognition Certificate easier, was criticised by gender critical feminists for promoting 'self-ID' practices, which they said would mean anyone who claimed to be a woman would be considered one in law. READ MORE: Nicola Sturgeon breaks silence on Supreme Court gender ruling Cherry added: 'It's simply not true to say that all opinions were taken account of in this debate. 'She branded the views of those of us who pointed out the implications for the rights of women, including lesbians, as 'not valid' and she called us transphobes bigots, racists and homophobes.' Speaking to reporters in Holyrood as John Swinney prepared to set out the SNP's legislative agenda, Sturgeon (below) also claimed that the Supreme Court ruling had contributed to the Scottish Government shelving its plans to make misogyny a specific hate crime. (Image: Andrew Milligan) Cherry said: ''Her snide suggestion that the Supreme Court judgement has stymied the Misogyny Bill has no basis in fact unless, of course, she is referring to the fact that misogyny was going to be defined as including hatred against men. 'She seems also to be forgetting that it was her Government that prevented sex being included as a protected characteristic in the Hate Crime Bill. 'Nicola Sturgeon is trying to rewrite history in relation to these matters, but those of us who fought her every inch of the way in her attack on the rights of women and LGB people will not let her do so.'
Yahoo
06-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Joanna Cherry slates 'snide' Nicola Sturgeon's response to Supreme Court ruling
File photograph of former SNP MP Joanna Cherry speaking in the House of Commons (Image: PA) JOANNA Cherry has hit out at Nicola Sturgeon's response to the Supreme Court verdict that women are defined by biology. The top court's ruling was seen as a major defeat for the trans rights movement – and the former SNP first minister broke her silence on the issue on Monday. Sturgeon said the judgment, which said women were defined in law by biology and which has triggered a roll-back in trans rights, could make trans people's lives 'unliveable'. Cherry, one of the former FM's fiercest critics within the SNP, accused Sturgeon of 'fatuous hyperbole'. She said 'To say that The Supreme Court judgment means we are 'at risk of making the lives of trans people almost unliveable' is 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.' Nicola Sturgeon reacts to UK Supreme Court judgement on the definition of a woman. Warns equalities watchdog guidance could make trans lives 'unliveable'. — Craig Meighan (@craigymeighan) May 6, 2025 The former SNP MP, who lost her seat at last year's General Election, also claimed Sturgeon was trying to 'rewrite history' by saying that all sides of the debate had been listened to when drawing up controversial trans rights laws, which have since been shelved. ADVERTISEMENT The SNP's Gender Recognition Reform Bill, which sought to make the process of getting a Gender Recognition Certificate easier, was criticised by gender critical feminists for promoting 'self-ID' practices, which they said would mean anyone who claimed to be a woman would be considered one in law. READ MORE: Nicola Sturgeon breaks silence on Supreme Court gender ruling Cherry added: 'It's simply not true to say that all opinions were taken account of in this debate. 'She branded the views of those of us who pointed out the implications for the rights of women, including lesbians, as 'not valid' and she called us transphobes bigots, racists and homophobes.' Speaking to reporters in Holyrood as John Swinney prepared to set out the SNP's legislative agenda, Sturgeon (below) also claimed that the Supreme Court ruling had contributed to the Scottish Government shelving its plans to make misogyny a specific hate crime. ADVERTISEMENT (Image: Andrew Milligan) Cherry said: ''Her snide suggestion that the Supreme Court judgement has stymied the Misogyny Bill has no basis in fact unless, of course, she is referring to the fact that misogyny was going to be defined as including hatred against men. 'She seems also to be forgetting that it was her Government that prevented sex being included as a protected characteristic in the Hate Crime Bill. 'Nicola Sturgeon is trying to rewrite history in relation to these matters, but those of us who fought her every inch of the way in her attack on the rights of women and LGB people will not let her do so.'
