The Beaumont Society is most disappointed at the UK Government’s decision to block the Scottish Parliament’s Gender Recognition Reform Bill. The GRR Bill does not affect equalities legislation as opponents of the Bill have claimed. Trans people do not need a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) to be protected by the Equality Act (2010). A GRC entitles an individual to have a birth certificate, a marriage certificate (if they are married) and, eventually, a death certificate in their acquired gender. Nothing else. When the Gender Recognition Act was first introduced in 2004, it could affect retirement ages and pensions, but these are now the same for men and women, so nothing else is affected. Unfortunately, the vocal opponents of these reforms are confusing the GRR Bill with the Equality Act, which it would seem that they wish to reform into an Inequality Act.
As Helen Belcher has pointed out, it is likely that this situation will “generate a case brought by the Scottish Government/Parliament, which will cost the taxpayer money. The UK Government is likely to lose the case as there is no basis for their decision.” Whether this is just to annoy the Scots and give trans people a kicking, or a ‘dead cat’ strategy to distract attention from their other failings, we do not know.
We had hoped that the Scottish reforms to the GRA would nudge the UK Government to follow the examples of countries like Ireland, Norway, Denmark, Belgium, Luxemburg, Malta, Iceland, Spain and Germany which have already introduced self-declaration for gender identity. Argentina has had self-declaration of gender for over ten years with no significant issues. What is particularly upsetting is that nervous cis women are being frightened into changing their everyday behaviour because of the scaremongering misinformation spread by the gender critical movement. No trans people were involved.
Not good at all – It doesn’t surprise me though. 💃🏻
One of the many upsetting aspects of the whole thing is that politicians and journalists keep repeating the smear that the reforms would have an impact on the Equality Act and women’s spaces. This is complete nonsense. The GRR has no impact on the Equality Act whatsoever: ‘sex’ and ‘gender reassignment’ are two separate protected categories in the Equality Act, and protection against discrimination for transgender people under the act does not require a gender recognition certificate. As part of that protection, transgender people are to be treated as the gender they self-identify as, and have a right to use single-sex spaces and services appropriate to their gender— again, a GRC is not required for this, and it never has been. Additionally, the Equality Act already contains provisions for transgender people to be excluded from single sex spaces, allowing legal discrimination under very strict circumstances where there is a clear risk or benefit.
I think it’s useful to point out that Scotland had different marriage age limits for many years, and it never seemed to cause a problem. Historically, 16 year-olds could legally marry in Scotland. This was why Gretna Green became such a well known destination for 16 year-old runaways from England. Successive Westminster governments seemed to accept it during that time. They never argued that those marriage certificates weren’t valid south of the border. Doesn’t it reinforce the idea that the current disagreement isn’t quite what it seems?
Absolutely! Very good point, Eleanor.