Committee
Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee 15 November 2022
15 Nov 2022 · S6 · Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee
Item of business
Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2
We heard many of the witnesses express very grave concerns about the provisions in the bill as it stands that will expand the definition of a “person with an interest” who could apply for a GRC to be revoked. That would substantially increase the risk that someone who disapproved of a trans person’s gender recognition certificate application would seek to use the courts to have that certificate revoked. Such vexatious or malicious complaints to the sheriff court to revoke a GRC, simply because someone does not accept the trans status of the GRC applicant, should not be enabled. If such applications for revocation ever happen, they should be viewed as vexatious and/or malicious and treated accordingly. One mechanism to reduce the opportunity to make vexatious or malicious applications for revocation is to clearly and narrowly define who a person with an interest is. The 2004 act defines a person with an interest quite narrowly as a spouse, the registrar general or the secretary of state. My amendment 97 would replicate that narrower definition to include a spouse, civil partner, the registrar general and the secretary of state. The aim is to limit the likelihood of unsupportive family members, or others who disapprove of a trans person’s right to be who they are, using the mechanism to challenge a GRC. My amendment 95 seeks to put in place a step before any revocation application gets to the sheriff court, by requiring it to go through the registrar general’s office first. The registrar general would then determine whether it was appropriate to escalate such a revocation application to the courts. However, I think that Pam Duncan-Glancy’s amendment 130 is better than mine, so I will not press my amendment 95 and will instead support hers. On the penalties for those who seek to revoke a GRC for vexatious or malicious reasons, my amendment 96 is, essentially, a probing amendment in an attempt to have a wider conversation before stage 3 to tighten up that bit of the bill. I will not move amendment 96 as, again, I think that Pam Duncan-Glancy’s amendment 132 covers that aspect more effectively. Nonetheless, I consider that we need further conversation to make it absolutely clear that malicious or vexatious attempts to revoke a gender recognition certificate will not be allowed, and will be taken very seriously when they happen. I move amendment 95.
In the same item of business
The Convener (Joe FitzPatrick)
SNP
Good morning and welcome to the 29th meeting in 2022 of the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee. We have received no apologies this morning....
The Convener
SNP
Amendment 18, in the name of Rachael Hamilton, is grouped with amendments 117, 38 to 41, 120, 42, 19, 43, 44, 46, 124 and 31. I draw members’ attention to th...
Rachael Hamilton (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con)
Con
The bill as drafted will extend the ability to obtain legal gender recognition to 16 and 17-year-olds. My amendments seek to retain the current minimum age r...
The Convener
SNP
I call Carol Mochan, who is joining us online, to speak to amendment 117 and the other amendments in the group.
Carol Mochan (South Scotland) (Lab)
Lab
I have lodged amendment 117 primarily to reflect the numerous expressions of concern that I and many others have heard regarding the bill’s content. What I w...
The Convener
SNP
I call Christine Grahame to speak to amendment 38 and other amendments in the group.
Christine Grahame (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP)
SNP
I am not sure whether you want me to move it at the beginning, but—
The Convener
SNP
No—move it later.
Christine Grahame
SNP
That is me told already. I was going to say, “I rise to speak to my amendments”, but I will not be rising. I will speak to amendments 38 to 44 and 46, all o...
The Convener
SNP
Yes.
Christine Grahame
SNP
There are just so many of them.
Karen Adam (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP)
SNP
You said that you have received support from Jackson Carlaw for your amendments. What kind of support have you had for them in conversations with other colle...
Christine Grahame
SNP
Strangely enough, I do not know—I have not gone around lobbying for them. All people in the Parliament are intelligent—I hope—and can see the amendments for ...
The Convener
SNP
I call Martin Whitfield to speak to amendment 120 and others in the group.
Martin Whitfield (South Scotland) (Lab)
Lab
It is always a pleasure to follow Christine Grahame, even when she seeks to insult my poor amendment. I intend to speak to amendments 124 and 120. As amendm...
Maggie Chapman (North East Scotland) (Green)
Green
I will speak generally about the amendments in the group. First, it is clear that the age of legal capacity in Scots law is 16. At that age, young people ca...
Pam Duncan-Glancy (Glasgow) (Lab)
Lab
I thank the members who have lodged amendments. I will speak to a couple of the amendments in the group. In short, there are merits to many of the amendments...
Fulton MacGregor (Coatbridge and Chryston) (SNP)
SNP
I will be very brief. It is fair to say that we heard quite a lot of evidence on this matter during stage 1. We heard varying views, so I am not surprised by...
The Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice, Housing and Local Government (Shona Robison)
SNP
In the committee’s stage 1 report, the majority of committee members agreed that the age of eligibility for applicants should be 16, and the bill’s general p...
Rachael Hamilton
Con
Although I understand the motive for Carol Mochan’s amendment 117—to try to implement a safeguard in the process—we will not support it, as we cannot envisag...
The Convener
SNP
The question is, that amendment 18 be agreed to. Are we agreed? Members: No.
The Convener
SNP
There will be a division. For Gosal, Pam (West Scotland) (Con) Hamilton, Rachael (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con) Against Adam, Karen (Banffs...
The Convener
SNP
The result of the division is: For 2, Against 4, Abstentions 1. Amendment 18 disagreed to.
The Convener
SNP
Amendment 114, in the name of Russell Findlay, is grouped with amendments 118, 119, 123, 125, 127, 129 and 131. I call Russell Findlay to move amendment 114 ...
Russell Findlay (West Scotland) (Con)
Con
Let us start with what should be a statement of the obvious: my opposition to the bill as it stands has nothing to do with the rights of those who identify a...
Shona Robison
SNP
I want to be clear from the start that the real threat to women and girls is predatory and abusive men. Unfortunately, as is the case around the globe, we li...
The Convener
SNP
I call Russell Findlay to wind up and press or withdraw amendment 114.
Russell Findlay
Con
I will make a number of points, and it is worth repeating my opening comment, which the cabinet secretary acknowledged: this not about trans people; it is ab...
Shona Robison
SNP
As I said, the justice secretary will put that into place before the bill is enacted, so it will be in advance.
Russell Findlay
Con
Thank you; that is reassuring.