EHRC guidance is that "The sex discrimination exceptions in the Equality Act... apply differently to a trans person with a GRC or without a GRC". If this is true (and I think it's been disputed, for the law is pretty unclear) then making it easier to get a GRC is far from being purely a matter of making it easier for trans people to get new birth certificates. It has obvious implications beyond that.
The fact that it may take a long time to meet the specialists and get a diagnosis is, it seems to me, a complaint about NHS waiting times, and shouldn't be confused with being a coherent argument against the gatekeeping mechanism in the GRA.
Btw, athough the author complains that "to a group of people who don’t know me and whom I will never meet", it would be invidious for the GRC to be decided upon by friends and acquaintances of the applicant. And the GRA allows the Panel to meet applicants if they feel it's necessary. In Jay v Secretary of State ( www.cloisters.com/images/M_Jay_v_Sec_of_State_for_Justice_2018_EWHC_2620_Fam_003.pdf ) it was recently held that the Panel has a duty to consider whether it's necessary to hold a hearing. But I don't necessarily see the value in compelling the Panel to hold a hearing if the evidence is clear-cut enough that it can make a decision without meeting the applicant.