SNP threatens court action as Sunak blocks ‘chilling’ gender Bill
RISHI SUNAK has blocked Nicola Sturgeon’s gender reforms after concluding they would have “chilling effects” on the safety of women-only spaces across the UK.
In an unprecedented decision approved by the Prime Minister, Alister Jack, the Scottish Secretary, announced that he would veto the Gender Recognition Reform (GRR) Bill.
He said that he had concluded the Bill would damage the operation of Great Britain-wide equalities legislation after receiving detailed legal advice on its effect. In a letter to Ms Sturgeon, he said that an order preventing the legislation would set out “in full the adverse effects”, including the effects on “the operation of single-sex clubs, associations and schools, protections such as equal pay and chilling effects on singlesex spaces”.
Mr Jack warned that the Bill also risked creating “significant complications” from having two different gender recognition regimes in the UK, with the potential for a person legally being male in Scotland and female in England or vice versa.
This would be exacerbated by the legislation letting 16- and 17-year-olds change their legal gender, unlike in the rest of the UK, he said. Mr Jack concluded that the result would be “more fraudulent or bad faith applications”.
In an attempt to issue an olive branch to the First Minister, he said he hoped they could work together to bring forward an amended Bill that addressed the problems.
However, Ms Sturgeon tweeted that the decision was a “full-frontal attack on our democratically elected Scottish Parliament and its ability to make its own decisions on devolved matters”.
She said her government “will defend the legislation and stand up for Scotland’s Parliament. If this Westminster
veto succeeds, it will be first of many.” Ms Sturgeon pledged to “vigorously defend” the Bill by applying to the Court of Session in Scotland for judicial review. Speaking before the announcement, she said she would be “very, very, very confident” of victory.
Ms Sturgeon’s reforms would allow
Scots to change their legal sex by signing a statutory declaration, removing the need for a medical diagnosis of gender dysphoria. They would also lower the time in which someone must live in their “acquired gender” from two years to six months and allow 16- and 17-yearolds to obtain Gender Recognition Certificates for the first time.
Fears have been expressed that the Bill will undermine women’s rights across the UK in schools, hospitals and prisons, as it would radically redefine who is legally considered female.
Mr Jack will today lay a Section 35 order in the Commons denying the Bill Royal Assent, along with a statement of reasons setting out the UK Government’s concerns. He is also expected to make a parliamentary statement.
Shona Robison, the SNP’S Social Justice Secretary, said Mr Jack’s decision was “outrageous” and claimed that it was a “dark day for trans rights and a dark day for democracy in the UK”.
Threatening court action, she added: “We will examine the reasons which the UK Government give for their order, once we have them, but take whatever steps we can to ensure that the democratic will of the Scottish Parliament is not frustrated.”
Although no political party committed to a ban on so-called conversion therapy in their 2019 general election manifestos, it was included in the last Queen’s Speech. The Government is now preparing to bring forward legislation, and is walking into a cultural and political minefield.
At its worst, conversion therapy is the use of persuasive techniques designed to prejudice a person’s views about his or her sexual orientation. Essentially, it tries to convince gay people to disavow their homosexuality and is often rooted in a religious context.
Indeed, this ban was originally intended to apply specifically to matters of sexual orientation. However, under pressure from campaigners, ministers are once again considering extending its scope to cover so-called transgender conversion therapy.
There is a suspicion that this move has been prompted by the row with the Scottish parliament over laws to allow transgender people to selfidentify without needing any medical diagnosis to back up their application.
Rishi Sunak has decided to invoke special powers under the devolution settlement to block this law on the grounds that its application in Scotland is contrary to UK equality statute. But ministers should not use the conversion issue as a trade-off in a constitutional dispute. If the Government believes the Scottish law is wrong then it should say so in terms and not conflate it with other matters.
The danger with banning transgender conversion therapy is that opportunities for children and their parents to talk their feelings through with medical professionals may be rendered unlawful. The term “conversion therapy” is itself a misnomer. No one should be trying to convert or “cure” anyone and there are already laws against coercion.
But vulnerable children and concerned parents face being left without any help to get through what is, by any definition, a difficult time. Moreover, if adults wish to seek advice, why should they be denied by state injunction?
Treating conditions like gender dysphoria as everyday experiences is a pernicious approach promoted by outfits like Stonewall. A Conservative government – or, indeed, any government – should not be browbeaten into bringing in a ban to appease trans campaigners.