Connect with us
...

Politics

Changing gender to be made easier in Scotland

Published

on

Scotland has approved a self-identification system for people who want to change their legal gender.

The new rules lower the age that people can apply for a gender recognition certificate (GRC) to 16, and removes the need for a medical diagnosis of gender dysphoria.

It’s the only nation in the UK to simplify the process of transitioning.

But the Westminster government says it has concerns about the legislation and could yet prevent it from becoming law.

The Scottish Parliament backed the controversial proposals by 86 to 39 in a vote on Thursday afternoon.

There were shouts of “shame on you” from protesters in the public gallery as the result was announced.

But there were also louds cheers and a standing ovation in the chamber from supporters of the reforms.

The UK government says it has concerns about the legislation and could seek to prevent it becoming law by blocking Royal Assent.

Conservative MSP Russell Findlay says the gender reform bill lets down women across Scotland

People in Scotland have been able to change their legal gender from male to female or female to male since 2005.

The Scottish government believes the existing process can be intrusive and distressing and put people off applying for a Gender Recognition Certificate.

The new rules, which are expected to come into force sometime next year, will mean applicants will now only need to have lived in their acquired gender for three months – or six months if they are aged 16 and 17 – rather than two years.

There will be also be a three-month “reflection period” during which they can change their minds and it will be a criminal offence to make a false declaration or false application for a GRC, with anyone who does so potentially facing up to two years in prison.

It will be possible to de-transition by going through the process again.

Shona Robison says evidence from other countries shows trans rights have no negative impact on other people

Campaigners say a move to make trans peoples’ lives easier is long overdue, and will allow them to “live with the dignity and recognition that everyone deserves.”

Scottish Trans manager Vic Valentine said the change in the law would mean that trans men and women would be able to show a birth certificate “that reflects who they are” at important moments in their lives such as starting a job or giving notice to be married.

But critics including author JK Rowling have raised concerns about the potential impact on women-only services, spaces and legal protections.

They have argued that there are insufficient safeguards to protect women and girls from predatory men who they say could seek to change their gender in order to gain access to facilities such as women’s prisons.

protest against the bill
Protestors against the reforms fear they will impact on women’s rights and single-sex spaces

Speaking ahead of the vote, Social Justice Secretary Shona Robison said: “Trans rights are not in competition with women’s rights, and as so often before, we can improve things for everyone when those discriminated against act as allies, not opponents.”

And First Minister Nicola Sturgeon said she would “never apologise for trying to spread equality, not reduce it, in our country.”

The UK government has not ruled out mounting a legal challenge, with Scottish Secretary Alister Jack saying it “shares the concerns that many people have regarding certain aspects of this Bill, and in particular the safety issues for women and children”.

The government is understood to be concerned about the potential impact of people with gender recognition certificates moving from Scotland to other parts of the UK, where a different system will still be in place, and on things like passports, pensions and some benefits.

Under UK law, it can apply to have Scottish laws struck down by arguing they would conflict with UK-wide equalities legislation. This power has never been used before.

The passing of controversial gender reform laws receive mixed reaction in the Scottish Parliament

Efforts by some MSPs to keep the minimum age at 18 were voted down, as was an attempt by Conservative MSP Russell Findlay to prevent convicted sex offenders being allowed to change their gender.

The reforms were backed by most SNP, Labour, Liberal Democrat and Green MSPs but opposed by the majority of Conservatives, who accused the government of attempting to avoid proper scrutiny of the legislation by rushing it through before Christmas.

Nine SNP MSPs voted against the government – the biggest rebellion since the party came to power in 2007.

Scottish Conservative equalities spokeswoman Rachael Hamilton said the party supported trans rights – but it should not come “at the expense of the safety of women and girls, and their hard-won rights”.

She added: “For a majority of MSPs to vote against an amendment that would have prevented convicted sex offenders from applying for a Gender Recognition Certificate will astonish and outrage most Scots.”

The Bill, which was previously shelved by the government, has been been one of the most controversial pieces of legislation in the history of the Scottish Parliament, with Community Safety Minister Ash Regan resigning in October after saying she could not support the proposals.

The moment the bill passed was an emotional one at Holyrood.

There were big cheers from trans-rights campaigners and cries of “shame” from women’s rights campaigners in the public gallery.

Two thirds of MSPs backed the bill with opinion divided in the three largest parties.

The MSP who resigned as an SNP minister to protest against the law, Ash Regan told me she was “ashamed” of the Scottish Parliament, while one of only three Tories to support the bill, Jamie Greene said he was “proud” of what had been decided.

The epic debate and vote on the gender recognition reform is not the end of the story.

It is likely to face a legal challenge from somewhere and the UK government is reserving the right to block the legislation, if they decide it could negatively impact on UK law.

The minister who fronted the reforms, Shona Robison, told me the legislation was “robust” and that she intends to put it into effect as soon as possible.

Speaking after the vote, Ms Regan told BBC Scotland she was “ashamed” of what the parliament had done.

MSPs considered more than 150 proposed amendments to the proposals in two marathon sessions on Tuesday and Wednesday – with the latter not finishing until 01:15 on Thursday.

The Conservatives were accused of attempting to delay the legislation by proposing numerous points of order and forcing almost all amendments to votes that were sometimes not required.

Nine other European countries have already adopted self-declaration systems for legal gender recognition, including Ireland, Denmark, Norway, Portugal and Switzerland.

Also on Thursday, Spain passed a bill bringing it a step closer to allowing people to change their officially registered gender by filling in a form.

Reports /TrainViral/

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Politics

Gething downfall delivers Starmer 1st headache

Published

on

By

Just when you’d have been forgiven for thinking politics might quieten down a bit…

The Welsh Labour government was for so long a case study in how the party could operate in power during its long years of opposition at Westminster.

And yet here we are less than a fortnight into a UK Labour government, and the Welsh Labour government is imploding.

So much for all that talk about bringing stability back to politics.

Last week Vaughan Gething was sharing smiles here not just with the new prime minister but the King too.

Now, he’s a goner, delivering Sir Keir Starmer a headache rather than a handshake.

When I was here in March covering Mr Gething’s victory, the seeds of his political demise were germinating before our eyes.

The donations row had already sprouted and his defeated opponent, Jeremy Miles, legged it from the venue without so much as any warm words about the victor on camera.

It was another sign of the cultivating anger, the political knotweed that would soon flourish and ensnare Vaughan Gething.

Along came the row about alleged leaking, a sacking, a confidence vote — and a first minister whose tenure up until today at least amounts to 2.4 times that of Liz Truss. Ouch.

Westminster has generated its fair share of turbulence in the last decade.

But it is far from unique as a source of turbulence in UK politics.

In February, Michelle O’Neill became first minister of Northern Ireland with Emma Little-Pengelly her deputy, after a long period without devolved government at Stormont.

In March, we had a new first minister of Wales, when Mark Drakeford stood down and Vaughan Gething took the job.

In April we had the resignation of the first minister of Scotland Humza Yousaf.

He was replaced the following month by John Swinney. June was the quiet month then. Just the small matter of a general election campaign.

And here we are in July, and Mr Gething is resigning.

So will begin another leadership race, a new government in Wales, a new first minister and a new team of senior Welsh ministers.

There will also be more arguments about Welsh Labour – its direction, its priorities, its capacity to govern effectively and its relationship with the UK party.

If you’re watching this in Downing Street, it’s the last thing you need.

Reports /Trainviral/

Continue Reading

Politics

Shoplifting crackdown expected to be unveiled

Published

on

By

A crackdown on shoplifting is expected to be announced in the King’s Speech on Wednesday.

The government is due to unveil a new crime bill to target people who steal goods worth less than £200.

The policy would be a reversal of 2014 legislation that meant “low-value” thefts worth under £200 were subject to less serious punishment.

The government is also expected to introduce a specific offence of assaulting a shop worker to its legislative agenda.

It will not be clear until legislation passes through Parliament what the punishments for any new or strengthened offences would be.

Data from the Office for National Statistics shows that last year was the worst on record for shoplifting in England and Wales.

Police recorded over 430,000 offences in those nations in 2023 – though retailers say underreporting means these figures are likely to represent only a fraction of the true number of incidents.

Michelle Whitehead, who works at a convenience store in Wolverhampton, said her shop had been “hit every day” by thieves.

People were stealing “absolutely anything” including “tins of spam, tins of corned beef, all the fresh meat”, Ms Whitehead told BBC Radio 4’s World at One programme.

“They’re just coming in, getting their whole arm and sweeping the lot off the shelves,” she said. “The shelves were always empty.”

She said she believed “organised” criminal gangs, rather than individuals struggling with the cost of living, were behind the thefts in her shop.

The crackdown on “low-value” shoplifting “will help a lot of little shops,” Ms Whitehead said.

While retailers and shop workers have welcomed the anticipated proposals, a civil liberties group has raised concerns about criminalising people struggling to make ends meet and overburdening the prison system.

The new legal measures are expected to be announced as part of the King’s Speech on Wednesday, a key piece of the State Opening of Parliament that allows the government to outline its priorities over the coming months.

Before the general election, the Labour Party pledged to reverse what it described as the “shoplifter’s charter” – a piece of 2014 legislation that reduced the criminal punishment for “low-value shoplifting”.

Tom Holder, spokesperson for the British Retail Consortium (BRC), told BBC News the impact of the 2014 legislation has been to “deprioritise it in the eyes of police”.

“I think police would be less likely to turn up to what they see as low-level theft,” he said.

Shoplifting cost retailers £1.8 billion in the last year, which could impact prices, according to the BRC.

“Shoplifting harms everyone in that sense – those costs eventually get made up somewhere, whether it’s prices going up or other prices that can’t come down,” Mr Holder said.

Co-op campaigns and public affairs director Paul Gerrard said the supermarket chain had also recorded rising theft and violence against shop workers.

“There’s always been people who will steal to make ends meet. That’s not what is behind the rise we’ve seen,” he told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme on Tuesday. “What’s behind that rise is individuals and gangs targeting large volumes of stock in stores for resale in illicit venues like pubs, clubs, markets, and out the back of cars.”

But Jodie Beck, policy and campaigns officer at civil liberties organisation Liberty, had concerns about the expected proposals, saying there is “already a wide range of powers” the police can use to tackle shoplifting and anti-social behaviour levelled at retail staff.

Ms Beck said the “£200 threshold” would not just target criminal gangs but also “people who are pushed into the desperate situation of not paying for things” because they cannot afford to make ends meet.

She urged the government to avoid focusing on “criminal justice and policing solutions instead of doing the thoughtful work of looking at the root causes of crime, which we believe are related to poverty and inequality”.

Ms Beck also argued the additional legislation could serve to worsen the UK’s “enormous court backlog” and its “bursting prison system”.

Last week, Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood announced plans to release thousands of prisoners early to ease overcrowding in the country’s prisons.

A spokesperson for Downing Street said the government would not comment on the King’s Speech until it has been delivered by the monarch.

The National Police Chiefs’ Council has been approached for comment.

Reports /Trainviral/

Continue Reading

Politics

Government launches ‘root and branch’ review

Published

on

By

Defence Secretary John Healey hailed the government’s defence review as the “first of its kind” and said it will “take a fresh look at the challenges we face”.

Mr Healey noted the “increasing instability and uncertainty” around the world, including the conflict in the Middle East and war in Ukraine, and said “threats are growing”.

The strategic defence review will consider the current state of the armed forces, the threats the UK faces and the capabilities needed to address them.

Sir Keir Starmer has previously said the review will set out a “roadmap” to the goal of spending 2.5% of national income on defence – a target he has made a “cast iron” commitment to but is yet to put a timeline on.

On Monday, the prime minister said the “root and branch review” of the armed forces would help prepare the UK for “a more dangerous and volatile world”.

The review will invite submissions from the military, veterans, MPs, the defence industry, the public, academics and the UK’s allies until the end of September and aims to deliver its findings in the first half of 2025.

“I promised the British people I would deliver the change needed to take our country forward, and I promised action not words,” Sir Keir said.

“That’s why one of my first acts since taking office is to launch our strategic defence review.

“We will make sure our hollowed out armed forces are bolstered and respected, that defence spending is responsibly increased, and that our country has the capabilities needed to ensure the UK’s resilience for the long term.”

The review will be overseen by Defence Secretary John Healey and headed by former Nato Secretary General Lord Robertson along with former US presidential advisor Fiona Hill and former Joint Force Commander Gen Sir Richard Barrons.

The group will have their work cut out.

The global security threats facing the UK and its Western allies are more serious and more complex than at any time since the end of the Cold War in 1990.

They also coincide with what many commentators have said is a catastrophic running down of the UK’s armed forces to the point where the country is arguably no longer considered to be a Tier One military force.

In terms of the number of troops in its regular forces, the British Army is now at its smallest size since the time of the Napoleonic Wars two centuries ago.

Recruitment is failing to match retention, with many soldiers and officers complaining about neglected and substandard accommodation.

The Royal Navy, which has spent vast sums on its two centrepiece aircraft carriers, is in need of many more surface ships to fulfil its tasks around the globe.

Its ageing fleet of nuclear-armed Vanguard submarines, the cornerstone of the UK’s strategic defence and known as the Continuous At Sea Deterrent (CASD), is overdue for replacement by four Dreadnought class submarines and costs are mounting.

Commenting on the review, Mr Healey said: “Hollowed-out armed forces, procurement waste and neglected morale cannot continue.”

Too many UK commitments?

The defence and security threats facing the UK, Nato and its allies further afield are multiple.

They include a war raging on Europe’s eastern flank in Ukraine against Russia’s full-scale invasion. The UK, along with the EU and Nato, has opted to help defend Ukraine with multi-billion pound packages of weapons and aid, stopping short of committing combat troops.

The policy behind this is not entirely altruistic. European governments, especially those closest to Russia like Poland and the Baltic states, fear that if President Putin wins the war in Ukraine it will not be long before he rebuilds his army and invades them next.

Some of those countries are already busy beefing up their own defence spending closer to 3% or even 4% of GDP.

The challenge for Nato has been how to provide Ukraine with as much weaponry as it can, without provoking Russia into retaliating against a Nato state and risk triggering a third world war.

The Royal Navy has been in action recently in the Red Sea, where it has been operating alongside the US Navy in fending off attacks on shipping by the Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen.

But the UK has also made naval commitments further afield in the South China Sea with the Aukus pact, comprising of Australia, UK and the US, aimed at containing Chinese expansion in the region.

Critics have questioned whether a financially-constrained UK can afford to make commitments like this on the other side of the world.

Closer to home in Europe, there is a growing threat from so-called “hybrid warfare” attacks, suspected of coming from Russia.

These are anonymous, unattributable attacks on undersea pipelines and telecoms cables on which Western nations depend.

As tensions increase with Moscow there are fears such actions will only increase and the UK cannot possibly hope to guard all of its coastline all of the time.

But while those nervous Nato partners living close to Russia’s borders are busy beefing up their defence spending closer to 3 or even 4% of GDP, the UK has so far declined to put a timetable on when it will raise its own defence spending to just 2.5%.

Opposition figures have criticised the government for refusing to say when defence spending will be increased.

Before his election defeat, former prime minister Rishi Sunak committed to reaching 2.5% by 2030.

Shadow defence secretary James Cartlidge previously said: “In a world that is more volatile and dangerous than at any time since the Cold War, Keir Starmer’s Labour government had a clear choice to match the Conservatives’ fully funded pledge to spend 2.5% of GDP on defence by 2030.

“By failing to do so, they’ve created huge uncertainty for our armed forces, at the worst possible time.”

Reports /Trainviral/

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2024 TechDaja News.