The Trans Rights Debate

[Moulin Yarns]

Section 35 states

Power to intervene in certain cases.

If a Bill contains provisions—
(a)which the Secretary of State has reasonable grounds to believe would be incompatible with any international obligations or the interests of defence or national security, or
(b)which make modifications of the law as it applies to reserved matters and which the Secretary of State has reasonable grounds to believe would have an adverse effect on the operation of the law as it applies to reserved matters,he may make an order prohibiting the Presiding Officer from submitting the Bill for Royal Assent.
(2)The order must identify the Bill and the provisions in question and state the reasons for making the order.



On what grounds is Jack intervening?

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Someone tried to put an amendment on the Gender Reform Bill to say that sex offenders or rapists shouldn't be able to Self-ID into woman's prisons and Nicola Sturgeon said that these were ill-founded concerns and pushed the Bill through so this aspect of the Bill is a concern for the safety of women in women only spaces.

That's not what happened.

There was an initial amendment which restricted the ability of sex-offenders to obtain GRCs. That was rejected by the Parliament.

A further, more appropriate and acceptable, amendment was subsequently passed.

[James310]

The warnings were there. Why were they ignored?

Reposting my interview from Feb 2022 with chair of UK's statutory regulator on equalities legislation @EHRC @EHRCChair who wrote to SG a number of times calling for a pause on GRR bill pointing out the potential conflict with the Equalities Act...

https://twitter.com/holyroodmandy/st...rNtkdVdfg&s=19

We have been here before, similar warnings about the UN Children's Rights Bill, but they ignored the advice and carried on anyway. Nicola Sturgeon used similar language at the time and said she can't fully protect children, but 18 months later the Bill has just been left on the shelf by the Scottish Government.

The GRA will go to court, likely be found to have exceeded it's powers and will need amendments, let's hope it doesn't just get forgotten about like the UN Children's Rights Bill.

[147lothian]

Maggie Chapman thinks its ok for 8 year old's to change sex, if vulnerable kids, some of whom will be gay some autistic and some victims of abuse were left alone to navigate adolescence, they would grow into well adjusted adults, I just hope vulnerable kids list to the growing number of De-Transitioners rather that people like Maggie Chapman. She really should leave the kids alone.

[archie]

Why is it being framed as a 'full frontal assault on the powers of the Scottish Parliament'? There's a process set out in the Scotland Act to allow the courts to determine whether or not it is beyond the powers set out in the Scotland Act. It either will or won’t be. I'm assuming that the vocal supporters of the legislation will be confident that the legislation has been properly and competently drafted. If so, what's the issue?

[Ozyhibby]

Anyone heard from Sarwar or Starmer?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ronaldo7]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Section 35 states

Power to intervene in certain cases.

If a Bill contains provisions—
(a)which the Secretary of State has reasonable grounds to believe would be incompatible with any international obligations or the interests of defence or national security, or
(b)which make modifications of the law as it applies to reserved matters and which the Secretary of State has reasonable grounds to believe would have an adverse effect on the operation of the law as it applies to reserved matters,he may make an order prohibiting the Presiding Officer from submitting the Bill for Royal Assent.
(2)The order must identify the Bill and the provisions in question and state the reasons for making the order.



On what grounds is Jack intervening?

We'll find out later on.

It's ironic that when the Scotland act was being debated, we didn't have a section 35, it was all wrapped up in clause 33, but the Tories were worried about the draconian nature of the power, and the potential to provoke political conflict.

Here we are today.

Section 35 was referred to as the "Governor general clause" as they knew it was the nuclear option. This was by the Tory Michael Ancrum.

[ronaldo7]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Anyone heard from Sarwar or Starmer?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ian Murray has spoken for them. I think he wants beer and a curry.

[ronaldo7]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Why is it being framed as a 'full frontal assault on the powers of the Scottish Parliament'? There's a process set out in the Scotland Act to allow the courts to determine whether or not it is beyond the powers set out in the Scotland Act. It either will or won’t be. I'm assuming that the vocal supporters of the legislation will be confident that the legislation has been properly and competently drafted. If so, what's the issue?

AIUI
Section 33 does.

Section 35 stops it in its tracks, and it's then on the SG to decide what to do.

[marinello59]

I’m not going to pretend that I fully understand all the issues around this. , I still find some of it slightly confusing. My gut instinct says this is well intended legislation with politicians from all parties trying to make the world a better place for some of our more marginalised citizens and that can only be a good thing.
I’m probably hoping in vain that both governments can get together before it reaches the courts to try and work out a common sense solution, it really shouldn’t be that hard. It would be good to see focus kept on the groups that this law is trying to help rather than it descending in to the usual petty point scoring. I may be wishing for too much there as well.

[ronaldo7]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Anyone heard from Sarwar or Starmer?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edinburgh Central Constituency Labour Party met tonight and voted to call for a strong response from @ScottishLabour against the Tory government's outrageous decision to block the Gender Recognition Reform Bill. Solidarity with trans people everywhere🏳️*⚧️

Scottish Young Labour stands opposed to the tories and their stance on the GRA reform. This was passed democratically by MSPs and trying to stop it is an attack on trans people. We support and stand side by side with the trans community!

Caroline Noakes, Tory MP and Chair of Westminster’s Women and Equalities Committee, tells #5live the GRR legislation in Scotland “doesn’t change the Equalities Act”

[hibby rae]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Ian Murray has spoken for them. I think he wants beer and a curry.

Aye he said trans people shouldn't be used for 'SNP vs Tory attritional warfare'. Which seems like he was wording it in a way to have a dig at both sides, which isn't very helpful here

[JeMeSouviens]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I’m not going to pretend that I fully understand all the issues around this. , I still find some of it slightly confusing. My gut instinct says this is well intended legislation with politicians from all parties trying to make the world a better place for some of our more marginalised citizens and that can only be a good thing.
I’m probably hoping in vain that both governments can get together before it reaches the courts to try and work out a common sense solution, it really shouldn’t be that hard. It would be good to see focus kept on the groups that this law is trying to help rather than it descending in to the usual petty point scoring. I may be wishing for too much there as well.

I think you're being hopelessly naive tbh. The SNP was happy to compromise enough to get Green+Lab+Lib support at Holyrood but will dig in in the face of UK challenge that plays neatly into the "standing up for Scotland" narrative. The Tories are using this as a double whammy of a straightforward "war on woke" wedge issue combined with a "muscular unionist" attempt to diminish Holyrood. They have neatly stitched up Labour who are so paranoid about being seen to be "woke" that they are not standing up for their own devolution project.

[heretoday]

Sturgeon set this whole thing up knowing Westminster would scupper it and add fuel to the indy fire.
Trouble is I doubt the majority of Scots agree with the bill - certainty not women anyway - so she's on thin ice.

[Ozyhibby]

https://www.theguardian.com/society/...box=1673953323


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JeMeSouviens]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Sturgeon set this whole thing up knowing Westminster would scupper it and add fuel to the indy fire.
Trouble is I doubt the majority of Scots agree with the bill - certainty not women anyway - so she's on thin ice.

I really don't think the first part is true. When gender recognition reform was first mooted it was more or less political orthodoxy. Since then we've seen a reaction to it that has caused internal difficulties for all parties, but particularly the SNP which is a broader coalition than the others. We've also seen elements of the right sieze upon it as a wedge issue. In the last few years it's gone from relatively uncontroversial cuddly-right-thing-to-do to political hot potato.

Which is not to say that the SNP won't try and milk the overrule from Westminster angle to the max. They absolutely will. In part to distract from the controversy of the issue itself.

[ElginHibbie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Sturgeon set this whole thing up knowing Westminster would scupper it and add fuel to the indy fire.
Trouble is I doubt the majority of Scots agree with the bill - certainty not women anyway - so she's on thin ice.

With the majority of Labour and Lib Dems MSPs (and even some Tories!) also voting for this bill it must mean Sturgeon really is playing some great 3d chess if she is getting anti-Independence parties to back a bill just to further her cause for Interdependence

[TrumpIsAPeado]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Sturgeon set this whole thing up knowing Westminster would scupper it and add fuel to the indy fire.
Trouble is I doubt the majority of Scots agree with the bill - certainty not women anyway - so she's on thin ice.

The majority of Scots haven't even read the bill. As to whether Nicola Sturgeon knew what Westminster would do or not is neither here or there as they simply shouldn't be doing what they are doing. To say that she is on thin ice is laughable when you consider that she is still by far the most positively viewed political figure in Scotland with the SNP achieving some of the highest polling figures since they came to power in 2007.

[weecounty hibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Sturgeon set this whole thing up knowing Westminster would scupper it and add fuel to the indy fire.
Trouble is I doubt the majority of Scots agree with the bill - certainty not women anyway - so she's on thin ice.

Ive tried to keep out of thos as much as possible but it's ***** like this that has made the debate toxic. So Nicola Sturgeon managed to persuade 2/3rds of Holyrood including Labout, Tory and Lib Dems to vote for something so she could push an anti union grievance. FFS go back and read what you have written. It's just unbelievable

[Bristolhibby]

Sometimes you’ve got to do the right thing for the smallest and most marginalised in our community. Just because it’s the right thing to do.

Not everything is a popularity contest, and may not be in line with public opinion.

J

[Stairway 2 7]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

https://www.theguardian.com/society/...box=1673953323


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not old enough to play the lottery or gamble. The reason is kids are too young vulnerable to make safe choices.

Too young have a bevvy, stand for election, be on a jury, watch an 18 movie, buy fireworks, have a credit card, work in a bar, get a tattoo, drive a car, use a sunbed.

I have they get all the support and help they need at 16, but it's such a life changing medical decision.

[The Harp Awakes]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Aye he said trans people shouldn't be used for 'SNP vs Tory attritional warfare'. Which seems like he was wording it in a way to have a dig at both sides, which isn't very helpful here

I'm mostly ambivalent about anything Labour politicians do or say these days, mainly because I see them as an irrelevance in Scotland. However nothing would delight me more than that clown Ian Murray losing his seat at the next GE.

[Ozyhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Sometimes you’ve got to do the right thing for the smallest and most marginalised in our community. Just because it’s the right thing to do.

Not everything is a popularity contest, and may not be in line with public opinion.

J

https://twitter.com/dhothersall/stat...LezQPzAT_IhN4A
Section 28 was not a popular change.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Glory Lurker]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I’m not going to pretend that I fully understand all the issues around this. , I still find some of it slightly confusing. My gut instinct says this is well intended legislation with politicians from all parties trying to make the world a better place for some of our more marginalised citizens and that can only be a good thing.
I’m probably hoping in vain that both governments can get together before it reaches the courts to try and work out a common sense solution, it really shouldn’t be that hard. It would be good to see focus kept on the groups that this law is trying to help rather than it descending in to the usual petty point scoring. I may be wishing for too much there as well.

You and I both on all you say here.

[JeMeSouviens]

Former SNP councillor Mhairi Hunter who is supposed to be close to NS:

Mhairi Hunter 🇺🇦 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿@MhairiHunter

I'm going to be quite brutal here but any political analyst or commentator who tries to tell you that the SNP engineered a confrontation with UK Gov over GRA reform is an idiot. They don't understand the situation at all. It is UK Gov that has engineered this conflict.

Mhairi Hunter 🇺🇦 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 @MhairiHunter

If you were going to set up a constitutional conflict would you do it over a toxic & polarising culture war shibboleth where the vast majority of the media is against you if not actively promoting said culture war? Only if you were absolutely ******g stupid.

Mhairi Hunter 🇺🇦 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 @MhairiHunter

This might be really hard for some folk to understand but Scotgov brought forward the legislation & most MSPs voted for it because they thought it was the right thing to do. That's it. You're fully entitled to disagree with them of course but that is what happened.

[Glory Lurker]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Not old enough to play the lottery or gamble. The reason is kids are too young vulnerable to make safe choices.

Too young have a bevvy, stand for election, be on a jury, watch an 18 movie, buy fireworks, have a credit card, work in a bar, get a tattoo, drive a car, use a sunbed.

I have they get all the support and help they need at 16, but it's such a life changing medical decision.

It's the age of legal majority in Scotland.

[Santa Cruz]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Not old enough to play the lottery or gamble. The reason is kids are too young vulnerable to make safe choices.

Too young have a bevvy, stand for election, be on a jury, watch an 18 movie, buy fireworks, have a credit card, work in a bar, get a tattoo, drive a car, use a sunbed.

I have they get all the support and help they need at 16, but it's such a life changing medical decision.

How can you be eligble to vote but not stand for election? Doesn't sound right. Mind you, you can get married at 16 but next to no chance of booking a hotel for your honeymoon in Scotland until your 18. Apologies for taking the topic of thread.

[Bristolhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Not old enough to play the lottery or gamble. The reason is kids are too young vulnerable to make safe choices.

Too young have a bevvy, stand for election, be on a jury, watch an 18 movie, buy fireworks, have a credit card, work in a bar, get a tattoo, drive a car, use a sunbed.

I have they get all the support and help they need at 16, but it's such a life changing medical decision.

As far as I’m aware you are legally an adult in Scotland at 16. They can vote in Scottish Parliamentary Elections and Scottish Council elections.

Stands to reason they would know their own body, having lived in it for over 16 years.

J

[Bristolhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

How can you be eligble to vote but not stand for election? Doesn't sound right. Mind you, you can get married at 16 but next to no chance of booking a hotel for your honeymoon in Scotland until your 18. Apologies for taking the topic of thread.

Lots of things you can do at 18 and not at 16.

I like what New Zealand are doing with cigarettes. Slowly raising the age of buying cigarettes, so eventually they will be illegal.

https://amp.theguardian.com/world/20...moking-by-2025

[Moulin Yarns]

Remember that Sandesh Gulhane, Scottish conservative health spokesperson voted for the legislation. A doctor agrees with the legislation but his bosses in London are disagreeing with his expertise on health!