Scottish Parliament final debate on Gender Recognition Reform today

[ArabellaScott]

At some point after 2pm, in the Big Room (the Chamber).

www.parliament.scot/chamber-and-committees/whats-on-and-watch-live/whats-on#wm

Will be interesting to see how the Amendments go down, if they are all struck down as the ScotGov wishes - www.holyrood.com/news/view,gender-recognition-reform-crunch-vote-after-shona-robison-warns-msps-over-amendments

'the Scottish Conservatives have warned that the debate could lead to a "travesty of democracy" because a 15 minute time limit for each proposal will "shut down" discussion.'

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-64032916

twitter.com/rachelevahobbs/status/1605567075472351232

I can feel the fury emanating from Scottish women right now.

twitter.com/acidkeith/status/1605563632867151872

Currently discussion of speed of minutes being produced.

Russell Finlay Amendment 50.

The use of pronouns makes no sense. Who refers to themselves by their pronouns (other than the performative sticking them on emails etc)? Other people refer to you by your pronouns. And then it’s when they are talking about the person not to the person. So what evidence goes to the court- an email someone has sent to someone else where they mention the individual concerned using sex-based pronouns?

What a load of nonsense.

Sorry, I'm [trying to work] so missing chunks here -

Finlay's amendment not accepted.

Now discussing another Amendment from Jamie Greene.

Liam Kerr - who is the arbiter and what constitutes a 'good reason'?

J Greene - Role of Registrar General is changing as a result of this legsilation, we should discuss this more

SRobison - Reg General must comply with a request for a review ... can confirm Nat Records of Scotland will 'do guidance'

Johann Lamont:

'a deep offense to women'

twitter.com/LabWomenDec/status/1605560047089594368

💚🤍💜

Pam Duncan Glancy now talking about accusations and malicious intent - I think this is to deter people who may wish to frustrate access for trans people

Murdo Fraser - references 'unfounded applications' which allow GRC to be revoked if Sherriff is satisfied application was fraudulent.

I understand intent, but concerned it's confused and throws up number of legal difficulties. A Sherriff to find an app is fraudulent or unfounded on balance of probabilities. This also allows for award of compensation where injured feelings have happened ... this is defined as one that was intentionally misleading made in accordance with applicants feelings about certificate [?]

We've had lengthy debates about fraud and evidence. No evidence required is whole principle. No requirement to change appearance or pronouns or dress.

[He's quite right]

MF - 'creating a mechanism with an ill-defined mechanism and throwing it onto the Sherriff with no history of case law'

Amendment would allow for compensation for malicious/unfounded apps to revoke - this may lead to a worry that if someone worried about financial consequences they would not raise problems/concerns about challenging a GRC

Someone asking if people can access public gallery. Chair is giving her a bollocking.

Away to do school run. Pls don't let them pass the bloody Bill while I'm away!

Sudden and possibly stupid idea but could lots of women - the xx sort - clog up the system by applying for GRCs but as women and taking the p!ss out of the whole thing but then not going through with it

Was in pub with two Scottish men last night encouraging them to get GRCs. Only thing to do now is troll. Everyone must get one and cause chaos.

This is interesting w.r.t. UK gov grounds for challenging the GRRB - basically that the change will mess with the EA as it changes how people are grouped (terrible explanation- had to deal with washing machine flooding the kitchen half way through 🤦🏻‍♀️)
ukconstitutionallaw.org/2022/12/21/michael-foran-sex-gender-and-the-scotland-act/

"Whether those with a GRC are considered legally women for the purposes of their individual rights is one thing. It is another thing entirely for this to mean that the principle of equality of opportunity no longer covers biological women as a distinct disadvantaged group relevant to biological men. But if that is the case, then there is a serious tension between the reserved matter of equal opportunities and the effects of this new Bill for advancing the distinct sex-based interests of biological women in Scotland."

suspended! what happened? have they voted?

"Rachael Hamilton seeking to lodge an emergency ("manuscript") amendment removing section 15A which refers to the Equality Act, so that the parliament can debate the substantive effect of the Haldane judgment of last week. Parliament suspended while Presiding Officer decides."

Lucy HB says leg stretch?
mobile.twitter.com/LucyHunterB/status/1605581943629787136

Ignore me!

www.scottishparliament.tv/meeting/meeting-of-the-parliament-december-21-2022?clip_start=14:50:53&clip_end=14:53:37

Basically this court of session ruling: www.heraldscotland.com/politics/23188282.court-session-gender-recognition-ruling-impact-new-law/ came after the deadline for amendments.

Ooh! Thank you! And thank you again Rachel!

Can’t even watch. Sex offenders protected. Women and girls not

welcome to Scotland

Wow, this is pretty significant from Rachael Hamilton isn't it? I had been thinking abouy how that court ruling related to this, interesting that it came through after the deadline for amendments- it's a really crucial point to the whole thing isn't it?

I saw TRAs crowing about that court ruling and then also saying 'GRA makes no difference to single sex spaces, that's covered by the Equality Act.

But obviously, if a GRC changes one's sex for the purposes of the characteristic of 'sex' in the Equality Act, and the law is changed so that anyone can do this really easily, then that is huge and needs to be talked about.

Was this really going to be pushed through without this even being mentioned?

I have to say, I am quite fascinated by the entire process of bills, debates, readings etc - it is really interesting how it is all done and the protocol around it.

This is what I was referring to my post this morning. This bill should be stopped especially in regard to that ruling. It basically makes the EA meaningless because a GRC makes a man a woman for ALL intents and purposes