Government response to Repeal the GRA petition

[XXylophonic]

Government responded:
The Government has no plans to repeal the Gender Recognition Act (2004).
The UK has long championed the rights of LGBT+ people at home and abroad.
This Government is proud of the Gender Recognition Act (GRA) 2004 and the rights it affords to transgender people in this country. The GRA has operated for 20 years and has allowed trans people to be recognised in law. The Act enables trans people to live, work and die in their acquired gender, ensuring that trans people can live with dignity and respect.
The Gender Recognition Act 2004 is a robust piece of legislation, with appropriate checks and balances that reflect the seriousness of changing a person’s legal sex. With multiple checks, medical evidence, legal declarations and clearances, the process is extremely rigorous.
The Equality Act 2010 sets out that providers have the right to restrict use of services on the basis of sex and gender reassignment in certain circumstances where it is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. This includes those with Gender Recognition Certificates. The Government is proud of the Equality Act and the rights and protections it affords women, and we will continue to support the use of its single-sex exceptions by providers.
In our manifesto, we committed to modernising gender recognition law whilst retaining the need for a diagnosis of gender dysphoria. We believe this strikes the
right balance. We will also uphold the Equality Act and its provisions on single-sex exceptions. This Government is steadfast in its dedication to protecting all its citizens irrespective of their sex, gender, or any other characteristic.
The Cabinet Office.

Predictable waffle, pretty much the same as last time.

"The process is extremely rigorous" haha

Change your name on a utility bill and pay a fiver - is there much more to it?

What's the GRA got to do with LGB people?

It's pretty much the response I expected.

In our manifesto, we committed to modernising gender recognition law whilst retaining the need for a diagnosis of gender dysphoria. We believe this strikes the right balance.

If it's such a robust piece of legislation, why do they need to modernise it?

Waffle waffle waffle- why the mention of LGB?

Transexual individuals managed to live lives with dignity and respect before the GRA
But since the trans umbrella was extended, that’s been forgotten

'With multiple checks, medical evidence, legal declarations and clearances, the process is extremely rigorous'

I can't remember the name of the clinic..Gender something .. but you can get a diagnosis of gender dysphoria online in an hour. Just pay the fee and say the right things. So much for 'medical evidence' and an extremely rigorous process.

I recall a thread a while back discussing how easy it would be to get a GRC. I could legally be a man in two years time!

Opposite-sex oriented males who desire access to provision for same-sex oriented females use the GRA to demand that they be given that access.

Creating a banner which conflates two groups with competing interests - those who desire access to opposite-sex facilities and services versus those who want same-sex provision - is a way of using “forced teaming” to silence those who would otherwise speak up.

It’s been a very successful strategy for the opposite-sex oriented males.

Labour Party policy is on board with that forced teaming, and they are in government. (Not that the previous government had got its act together sufficiently to do anything about that.)

I realise it was a rhetorical question, by the way.

If any of what they claim happens were actually happening, and if the different pieces of legislation were working and being applied as they say they, are then their response might have some merit.

Good to have it reiterated that exemptions can be applied thanks to the Equality Act, but it's useless unless that actually happens and is accepted as what can and should happen.

It was a Labour government that created the law, repealing it would mean admitting that Labour got it wrong, which would call into question all the other laws Labour have ever past. So it was never going to happen, but at least it's a matter of public record that the people object to the law, as is their mealy mouth response.

At least future historians will know who to blame for the West going off it's collective trolley.

Agree, it's never going to be repealed unless we get a Trump-style government which would obviously be horrendous for lots of reasons. The best feasible alternative is that a GRC becomes next to useless (FWS outcome pending) and actual sex is still recorded somewhere (even if only accessible to view/use for particular purposes).

Well, quite. It's complete bollocks to say the process is extremely rigorous; it's patently anything but. And the primogeniture clause: proud of that too, Labour? And what about their previous tacit acceptance that the GRA was largely about the lack of gay marraige at the time? The situation nowadays is completely different.

Dont forget that the written response is required after a petition gets 10,000 signatories.

If 100,000 or more sign the petition there has to be a public debate.

ie just possible that there are some MPs who dont agree with the Labour party line.