The next item of business is a debate on motion 6459 in the name of Shona Robison on the Gender Recognition Reform Scotland Bill at stage 1. I invite members who wish to speak in the debate to press their request to speak buttons now. I call on Shona Robison to speak to and move the motion up to 9 minutes, Cabinet Secretary. Thank you, Presiding Officer. The Gender Recognition Reform Scotland Bill reforms the process that has been in place for the last 18 years for trans men and women to obtain a Gender Recognition Certificate or GRC. We know from extensive consultation as well as from evidence heard by the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee that many trans people find the current system over-medicalised, complex, intrusive and invasive. Those barriers are currently preventing many trans people from applying for a GRC. This bill will make it the process simpler, more streamlined and more respectful of the privacy and dignity of trans men and women. I'm grateful to the committee for their majority support for the general principles of the bill and thank them for their extensive work scrutinising the bill. I also want to thank the many organisations and individuals who have participated in providing evidence since the bill was introduced. I acknowledge that people across this chamber and in the wider public have differing and genuinely held opinions on the matter of gender recognition reform. When I introduced this bill, I committed to listening to the views of everyone in a respectful manner. I have done that and continue to do that and I am confident that this afternoon's debate will be open, considered and respectful, consistent with the approach taken by the committee. As a Parliament, I think that we have a responsibility to protect and support minority groups. One way we can do this is by leading by example with the tone of our discussions and the committee and this chamber today has always ensured that the tone is respectful. However, we know that it's not always the case outside of this Parliament and particularly on social media. Abuse directed at anyone, whatever their opinion on this matter, is wrong. It's important to recognise that discrimination, harassment and abuse faced by trans people in Scotland simply for living their lives is wrong too. Statistics from Police Scotland show increases in hate crimes against people for being transgender have increased. Evidence suggests that the tone of discourse surrounding legal gender recognition has contributed to this. No matter what your point of view, we can all call this out where we see it and remain respectful to each other's opinions. Murdo Fraser. I endorse everything that she has just said about the tone of this debate. Is it the Scottish Government's position that the issue of a gender recognition certificate changes someone's sex in relation to the Equality Act 2010? If so, that will open to biological males a whole range of spaces and services currently reserved to women and girls. That change will be made without the need for any medical intervention. There is no change to the protections under the Equality Act 2010.  I know that people have concerns about those reforms and they generally centre on the potential impact on women and girls. Their ability to safely and confidently access single sex services and spaces be accommodated safely in prisons and participate fairly in sport. I'm sympathetic to those concerns because I know from my own experience and from years of working to improve women's rights that women and girls still face inequality and an increased risk of harm in Scotland today. This Government continues our work to address this, including through the equally safe strategy and work to address misogynistic behaviour, because we know from all the evidence that the threat to women comes from predatory and abusive men, not trans women or trans men. I'm helping one group to briefly, Brian Whittle. I'm very grateful to the cabinet secretary for giving me in. She will recognise my passion to make sure that everybody has access to sport equally. But would she recognise that when male and female go through puberty, there are significant changes happen? The cue angle that hit the ability to apply that force, a third more muscle mass, a third more bone density, increased heart and lung capacity, menstruation, and the fact that a similar sized man to a woman can apply 160 per cent of the force of a woman. Does she recognise that danger that poses to women in sport where power and speed are important? Will she agree with me that an open category alongside male and female would allow fair and equal participation for all? Cabinet secretary, can I be clear that this bill changes none of that? It's for the sports governing bodies to establish what is right for their sport, and the member will be aware of sports governing bodies doing that. So it's for the sports governing bodies to do that. Just going back to helping one group to better access their rights does not mean diluting or diminishing the rights of another group. We've set out why the bill will not change the provision of single sex services, prisons or sport because none of these are dependent on a possession of a GRC. In this view is supported by the Scottish Human Rights Commission, Amnesty International and other human rights organisations. I'm glad that the majority of the committee has also concluded that there is no evidence to suggest that the rights of women and girls are impacted negatively by the bill. We all want to live in a society that includes and supports everyone to live in a way that is true to themselves and that allows them to be accepted for who they are. Improving trans people's access to their existing legal rights is an important part of making that a practical reality. The Scottish Government has consulted widely on this issue in two of the largest public consultation exercises we've ever undertaken, and I'm grateful to the committee for continuing in that vein. A huge body of evidence has been gathered throughout the passage of the bill so far and a significant amount of work has gone into the production of the stage 1 report. I'm pleased that, following their extensive evidence sessions, the majority of the committee support the general principles of the bill. I recognise that there is a minority view expressed, however it's also clear that the strong cross-party agreement that reform is needed. It's encouraging that, while the committee has requested more information and explanation in some areas, there are no specific recommended changes to the provisions of the bill as introduced. I also welcome the majority view of the committee that the age of eligibility for applicants should be 16. The committee heard that young trans people currently feel excluded from the system, particularly at an age where they want consistent documentation before entering higher or further education or starting their first job. I agree that it will be important to ensure appropriate support and signposting to resources for all applicants, in particular for those aged 16 and 17. In line with the recommendation made by the Children and Young People's Commissioner, young people will be involved in the development of the process and guidance. Christine Grahame. Cabinet Secretary, I support the bill in principle, but I have got some concerns about age range 16 to 18, notwithstanding the guidance that I know is being discussed, and also in that age range about the living in that gender for just three months. Accordingly, I'm on the cusp of considering amendments, but I'd rather discuss this with the Cabinet Secretary first. Will she meet with me to discuss these particular issues? I give her assurance that I am supporting it at stage 1, but I just want to put that marker down. Cabinet Secretary. I'm happy to give that commitment. The majority of the committee support a reduction in the period of time that applicants must have lived in the acquired gender. In my view, three months living in the acquired gender, followed by a three-month reflection period, represents a balanced and proportionate reduction in the overall length of the process, while ensuring that applicants have a further opportunity to consider their decision before proceeding. I have taken to account evidence given to the committee that the reflection period could be a disproportionate barrier where an applicant is terminally ill, and appreciating the important benefit of a GRC is ensuring that your death registration reflects the gender in which you lived. I therefore intend to introduce an amendment to the bill for a dispensation for the three-month reflection period where an applicant is terminally ill. The committee is short of time, but I'll address things in my closing if you want to put them on the record later. The committee sought further clarity on the meaning of ordinarily resident in the bill, which we've provided in our response. Ordinary resident is an established concept in several areas of law, including pensions and benefits, taxation and jurisdiction, including at least 17 acts of this Parliament. In general, it means that someone's residence here is voluntary for settled purposes and lawful. The committee noted the concerns raised by several witnesses by the provision that allowing a person who has an interest in a GRC to apply to the sheriff to revoke a certificate that might allow legitimate applications to be frustrated. While I understand these concerns, under the bill, a person seeking to revoke a certificate has to have a genuine interest in the GRC. It would have to affect them materially and personally or professionally, and it would have to prove the ground on which the certificate could be revoked. References to a person who has an interest are also common in acts of this Parliament. The committee rightly highlights that it is important to trans people that a GRC issued in Scotland should be recognised in the rest of the UK. Trans people will continue to be predicted from the gender reassignment discrimination under the Equality Act 2010 throughout the UK whether or not they have a GRC. It will be for other jurisdictions to set their policy on whether they recognise legal gender recognition obtained elsewhere. Under the current system, some who have obtained legal gender recognition out with the UK, including under systems based on self-determination similar to this bill, can apply in the UK without needing to provide any medical evidence. It is, of course, not uncommon for Scottish legislation to have implications for the rest of the UK. A section 104 order under the Scotland Act 1998 provides a mechanism for the UK and Scottish Governments to work together to make consequential modifications. The Scottish UK and Northern Irish Governments are working together at official level, and I have written to the UK Minister for Equalities reaffirming our commitment to work constructively together on this matter. In conclusion, there is majority support from the committee for the bill as introduced. Four of the five parties in the chamber advocated for gender recognition reform in their manifestos. The Scottish Government has responded to the committee's request for further clarity in the written response. The bill has been subject to extensive scrutiny, both by the public through consultation and by a range of experts and stakeholders during the committee's evidence sessions. It is clear from the stage 1 report that the committee's majority view is that the proposed reforms will support trans men and women to obtain legal gender recognition in a manner that has significantly less demeaning than the current medicalised system. Presiding Officer, I look forward to hearing the views of MSPs and I welcome the opportunity to engage with them again on this bill. Once again, I thank the committee for their work during stage 1 and to come. Thank you. I will take this opportunity to advise members that there is some time in hand for interventions. I now call on Jo Fitzpatrick to speak on behalf of the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I am grateful for this opportunity to speak in this debate as convener of the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee. I would like to thank everyone who provided evidence to our committee. All of us, all of the evidence, both written and oral, informed our consideration of the bill. I also want to put on record our thanks to the committee clerks and SPICE researchers, and everyone else who supported our work thus far on the bill. Presiding Officer, I should preface my remarks by highlighting that while the committee did reach agreement on many issues, we were not unanimous on all issues. Those divergences are reflected in our report. My speaking time this afternoon is limited, so my remarks as convener will focus on the majority view of the committee on key aspects of the bill. I am sure that those members who represent the minority view will take the time to set out their thoughts later in their contributions. Presiding Officer, by a majority of 5 to 2, the committee supported the general principles of the bill. I thank the member, but unfortunately there is so much work in the committee's report that I am going to make sure that I am taking the time to go through that work, so unfortunately I will not be able to take interventions. The committee supports the removal of the gender recognition panel and its replacement with a model based on self declaration. That will introduce a more humane and less intrusive process, bringing Scotland in line with international best practice and human rights standards. The committee also supports the removal of the requirement for a diagnosis of gender dysphoria and medical evidence. We heard evidence that medical gatekeeping is neither necessary nor appropriate. The legal status of a statutory declaration, the gravity with which such declarations are made and the fact that they are making a false declaration is an offence, together create a robust process for accessing a GRC in line with international human rights best practice. The committee supports the proposed reduction from two years. I am speaking as the convener of the committee and I am trying to get through a really in-depth report that the committee covered a lot of issues, a lot of ground, if there is time at the end then perhaps there will be time. I am speaking as the convener of the committee. It is really important that we cover the huge amount of work that the committee did and if anyone wants to take the time then please take the time to look at that report. Point of order, Stephen Kerr. Presiding Officer, it is very important that members have the opportunity to intervene on the convener of this committee. There are matters of concern that should be raised in a calm and sensible way to reflect the concerns that have been made to us as members of the Scottish Parliament in respect to the work of the committee. Thank you Mr Kerr for that point of order. As members will be aware, it is entirely a matter for the member speaking as to whether or not they accept an intervention. I am Joe FitzPatrick. Thank you, Presiding Officer. To carry on, the committee supports the proposed production from two years to three months of the period that an applicant must have lived in their acquired gender before applying for a GRC. We did however query the reasoning behind the specific choice of three months and I note the response from the Cabinet Secretary stating that this represents the Government's view of a balanced and proportionate way of improving the current system. We also asked the Scottish Government to consider whether the three months reflection period is appropriate and I welcome the Scottish Government's response, in particular its proposed amendment in relation to those who are terminally ill. The committee also supports lowering the age of eligibility from 18 to 16. That accords with existing rights in terms of the Age of Legal Capacity Scotland Act 1991. We have heard that most young people reached decisions about their gender identity long before they consider applying for a GRC. I welcome the Government's commitment to work with the children and young people's commissioner and young people's organisations to ensure guidance is in place on the effects of obtaining a GRC as well as signposting to specialist support. On the requirement that applicants must be ordinarily resident in Scotland, the committee sought clarity on several eligibility issues and I note the response from the Scottish Government highlighting challenges around devolved competency and confirming that the Cabinet Secretary has raised those issues with the UK Government. On the issue of GRCs issued in Scotland being recognised in the rest of the UK, which we heard was important to trans people, I note the information set out in the Scottish Government's response to the committee confirming that applicants from over 40 countries can apply via a streamlined UK route, including countries which have introduced similar reforms to those proposed in Scotland such as Belgium, Denmark, Norway and Iceland. On the bill's provisions that a person of interest may apply to revoke a GRC on various grounds, a report calls for any vexatious complaints to be dealt with robustly. The Scottish Government has helpfully provided additional information including setting out the wider legislative context in terms of the drafting of this provision and provided examples of persons who might be considered to have an interest. A report noted concerns about avoiding criminalising anyone who enters into an application process for a GRC in good faith and then changes their mind. The committee has since received assurances from the Scottish Government about the process for withdrawal of an application and the process through which a person who has obtained legal gender recognition can legally change their gender again or detransition. Concerns were raised with the committee on minority ethnic groups and religious belief. While recognising that such views are sincerely held, the committee believes that the concerns raised go beyond the scope of the bill and we are satisfied that the bill itself will not change any of the protections or definitions set out in the Equality Act 2010. On concerns of whether the bill may impact upon decisions relating to how to transgender people in Scotland's prisons, the committee believes that this is outwith the scope of the bill. Notwithstanding this, we were satisfied that the process of possession of a GRC does not affect the Scottish Prison Services risk assessment process, whereby an individual is placed in the most appropriate estate, whether for their own safety or the safety of others, regardless of whether or not they have a GRC. Trans people's participation in sport was also raised in evidence, which the committee notes is an issue that is much wider and largely unconnected with the provisions in this bill. The committee agrees with the view of sport Scotland that GRCs have no impact on participation in sport in accordance with the exemptions provided in section 195 of the Equality Act 2010. While noting the complexities outlined by the Scottish Government on the extension of the bill to non-binary people, the committee was disappointed that this issue cannot be dealt with in this bill. We heard in evidence from young trans and non-binary people that this is an issue that is particularly important to them, and I welcome the Scottish Government's commitment to develop an action plan by spring 2023 based on outcomes from the working group on non-binary equality, setting out how it intends to improve equality and bring about real, positive and lasting changes to the lives of non-binary people. On behalf of the committee, I would like to thank everyone who engaged in our stage 1 scrutiny of the bill. I want to particularly thank the trans people and parents who shared their experiences with the current system. It was really helpful us to hear their personal stories and I recognise that doing so took courage. I'd also again like to thank everyone who supported our work thus far, particularly the committee clerks and spice researchers. By a majority of 5 to 2, the committee recommends that the general principles of this bill be approved. I now call on Rachel Hamilton. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Considering that some of the members will not take interventions, I'd like to ask them a couple of questions. First of all, I'd like to know from the Cabinet Secretary in her closing whether she actually believes GRC changes your sex for the purposes of the Equality Act, to answer that to my colleague Murdo Fraser and there are other interventions that I hopefully will get into members later but it's already eating into my speech because I just think that this needs to be a really open debate. We need to get this crucial legislation absolutely right. The current system for obtaining a GRC has of course been distressing for many and I hope that we'll all agree today that we can improve the rights for trans people but we also need to protect vulnerable young girls and the hard one rights of women and girls. It is in this spirit that I want to outline the deeply held concerns of my own my colleagues on these Scottish Conservative benches and according to recent polling a clear majority of the Scottish public who oppose the removal of key safeguards. Sadly so far these legitimate concerns that I believe have been ignored by this government and even our voices I believe are being ignored today. The cabinet secretary was generous with her interventions but I do believe that the convener should have at that point taken some interventions and as we move through the debate I think that we should be honest and transparent. The bill received one of the highest volumes well I haven't even got into the substance of my speech but I will if there's something specific about that. The bill received one of the highest volumes of written evidence in the history of the Scottish Parliament. We've heard 11,000 submissions much of those contributions were overlooked unfortunately in the report but I would like to take the opportunity to everyone who did contribute to those submissions and unfortunately I regret to say that the timetable committee had to set to consider evidence meant that only a small proportion of contributions could only be considered. It's important that those voices who have been ignored in this debate can be heard and the legitimate concerns about this bill can be discussed. A GRC is not just a piece of paper Mr Justice Skollfield of the High Court in Northern Ireland described it as conferring a significant and formal change in a person's status with potentially far-reaching consequences for them and for others including the state and the implications of this bill go beyond simply helping trans individuals gain recognition of their acquired gender. One of the overlooked implications were the significance of the bill's effect on the Equality Act. The Scottish Government and several members of the committee claim that the Equality Act does not fall within the scope of this bill yet in less than two weeks time the Scottish Government lawyers will be in court arguing that a GRC would change an individual's sex under the Equality Act for the purposes of the Gender Representation Act on Public Boards. The GRC have also shared concerns about the consequences of the bill on the Equality Act noting that extending the ability to change sex under the Act from a small defined group who have demonstrated their commitment and ability to live and acquire gender to a wider group who identify as the opposite gender at a given point and that will have clear implications for the operation of the Act and the bill drafted is strictly linked to the Equality Act as I am trying to explain. Let's just drop the pretense and have a grown-up conversation about what it means to issue more GRCs to a wider group and the obvious implications for women's sex-based rights. I appreciate Rachael Hamilton giving way. I wonder if the committee received a definition of what it means to live an unacquired gender. Rachael Hamilton. That is a great question because the definition was already in the GRA 2004 and this is just rolling it over into this legislation as the SNP would like to see it reformed and I hope that answers your question but maybe not as such but there were also lots of debate around the acquired gender of what it meant. It does it mean that you're dressing in a certain way, acting in a certain way, speaking in a certain way so there is a lot more discussion around this that could be had and debated. When organisations like MBM and 4 Women's Scotland talk about protecting single sex spaces and the rights of women in Scotland they do so because they know that this bill and its consequences as outlined by the EHRC erodes the legal protection of single sex spaces we cannot allow these arguments to be ignored until this legislation has undermined measures that protect women's dignity, privacy and safety and promotes their equality Presiding Officer a bad faith actor would currently find it very difficult to obtain a GRC but with the proposed reforms a non-falsifiable declaration is all that would stand between them and receiving a GRC which means they could insist on using or getting access to female-owned changing rooms, rape shelters healthcare services and women's prisons we are being asked to vote on all or nothing choice between the system of safeguards currently in place and self declaration on a false dichotomy of elaborate oversight or no oversight legislators in 2004 did not decide upon the safeguards in place today by accident I appreciate that some of the hurdles trans people must overcome to obtain a GRC are tied up in these safeguards but there is room to make the process easier without tearing it to pieces and there is certainly room to work on reducing the time trans people have to wait throughout this process for medical support from our NHS it is a task our legislators here and it's a hard one to ensure that safeguards exist so that this system is not taken advantage of and I hope that members today can join with me and achieve that aim rather than just accept that we can reform this legislation without doing so concerns were also raised and ignored about lowering the age at which somebody can obtain a GRC to 16 indeed some of the evidence used to support these concerns came from the interim CAS review which was similarly brushed aside by the majority of the committee this landmark review notes that yes Pam Duncan-Glancy I don't think it's fair to say that the CAS review was brushed aside I specifically and others highlighted that there were areas that the CAS review was looking into that organisations in Scotland could learn from it wasn't that we said it should be brushed aside I don't think that that represents the committee's conversation Pam Duncan-Glancy for her intervention perhaps it's just being a bit brutal on the views of the committee however my colleague Pam Gozzle and I think that this legislation should be paused until the CAS review is published in full because this landmark review notes that a young person's gender identity may remain in flux until their mid-twenties this point was backed up by written and oral evidence in the committee without addressing that evidence and dismissed out of hand the cabinet secretary failing to acknowledge any opposition to her view on that point this part of the bill has left so many unanswered questions the opportunity represented by the CAS review to gain clarity has been spurned I believe it was deeply irresponsible of the committee members who chose to do so and as Dr Cas made clear social transition is not a neutral undertaking is Parliament really going to pretend that changing a teenager's legal status from one sex to another is there is so much more to cover in this debate but with my remaining time I just want to highlight some other unanswered questions the committee inquiry exposes many of these and answers few I've talked about the effect of the bill and the equality act perhaps the courts will give us some clarity next month but I haven't even begun to discuss the cross-border anomalies highlighted by the EHRC the extension of the overseas recognition associated with the bill or the impact on marriage and civil partnerships presiding officer with regret I believe this is a mess the unintended consequences of this legislation for women and girls, vulnerable young people and the trans people is trying to help but is deeply alarming and the divisive nature of the issue has been handled poorly I know you're looking at me to close I have so much to say but it is crucial absolutely crucial that we get this legislation right but the SNP Government need to start listening to the legitimate concerns of women and the Scottish public so far there is little evidence that they have done so thank you I now call on Pam Duncan-Glancy thank you trans rights are human rights unalienable, indivisible and interdependent human rights are our rights not because we are women or trans or gay or disabled or black but because we are human and society and parliament have a legal obligation to uphold them for trans people being recognised in law for who you are is fundamental to this in committee and throughout my equality and human rights campaigning life I have heard and I am in no doubt that the process to do this is dehumanising, intrusive offensive, expensive and lengthy and needs to change I and Scottish Labour will therefore be voting for this bill at stage 1 today we have always been at the forefront of equality and human rights and we always will defend and protect them taking unnecessary and unhelpful medical requirements out of the process and replacing it that is dignified, more accessible administrative in nature and delivers a process in which both trans people and the wider public can have confidence is not just long overdue or compliant with international best practice it is essential for a society that believes in equality and human rights and it is the right thing to do as the bill proceeds, yes Sue Webber I thank the member for taking the intervention does the member believe and agree with her party's former leader Joanne Lamont who said that MSPs must consider any unintended consequences of gender reform on women and girls Pam Duncan-Glancy I thank the member for that intervention and we do believe that the consequences of the legislation and the data collected as a result of it needs to be strengthened so that we can properly evaluate the legislation when it comes in to pass and that is why we think that there are amendments that need to be brought on data collection and post legislative evaluation As the bill proceeds, Scottish Labour will seek to ensure the new arrangements for the application and administration of GRCs does this. We believe that to ensure this, there are a number of areas where the legislation can be improved including on the process the register general will put in place to apply for a GRC the provisions around age on signposting to support and information on the data collected for GRCs and that addresses hopefully the member's point and as is the duty upon all of us as legislators we stand ready to scrutinise the bill to ensure that it does all of this but before I turn to the detail I want to say a word about the conversation so far it is my view that delays to the legislation have allowed a vacuum to develop and people to interpret the bill as something it is not to reach wrong or unproven conclusions about what its impacts may be this has made conversations around it very difficult at times hurtful and damaging I also know there are people including some women who have concerns about the impact of the bill and specifically on the protection of single sex services as a disabled woman I know that all rights are hard fought and hard won and so I understand the strength of feeling and I understand why people need strong assurance that their rights will be protected it is essential that everyone's rights are protected in all the evidence I've heard and it's a lot it's clear to me that women's and trans rights can, must and do already exist without one causing detriment to the other mostly because people respect one another but also because the protections in the equality act make that so Labour introduced that act and it rightly protects both women and trans people from discrimination that's why we support both reform of the gender recognition act and the continued implementation of protections and provisions within the 2010 act as the bill progresses Scottish Labour believe it should be clear in the legislation that nothing in it affects the protections in the equality act we will bring an amendment at stage 2 to do that and following the positive conversations that I've had with the cabinet secretary I'd be grateful if she would indicate the Government's support for this in closing if, Presiding Officer, is there time back if I take an intervention there is a little time I'll take an intervention Pam Duncan-Glancy Does she believe that a GRC changes sex for the purposes of the equality act? Pam Duncan-Glancy I believe that a GRC changes sex for all legal purposes including the equality act but I also believe that the equality act is a piece of legislation that gets the interaction between sex and gender perfectly correct it is an act that can flex to context and situations and it is the act that is in place to protect all people's rights and they can exist all along side one and other I and my party are I and my party are committed to reform but we all need organisations to be empowered to do the right thing and everyone to be able to enjoy their rights equally and in peace that needs leadership and clarity this would help bring that and I asked the Government to work with us on it and indeed on the other areas of the bill that we believe must be strengthened as it stands the bill sets out we can apply for a GRC but not how there is little detail on what the application to the register general will look like the information the register general will require nor what information they will give applicants to apply the use of the term acquired gender in section 4 is unclear and does not recognise that steps prior to seeking legal recognition will have been long and well thought out the same is true of the reflection period introduced by section 3 and I know that many trans people find this deeply offensive and we acknowledge this area of the process and the length of these periods are considered by many to be arbitrary, clarity on the rationale for that from the Government would be welcome we note that the Government have said that the national record of Scotland should draft guidance on the process but we'd like to see more detail we believe that that will be crucial we'd also like clarity around the regulatory powers introduced by section 11 that allow the register general to request additional evidence specifically on that point we seek reassurance that medicalisation cannot be reintroduced to the process we also have concerns about the limitations of the term ordinarily resident in section 2 which could exclude refugees and asylum seekers from the process I do not believe this would be fair and we note the comments on this in the Government's response to the committee report and we'd like the opportunity to discuss this and consider it further too often trans people wait years for services or support information they need is rarely available and they can be left isolated whilst we note the Government has referred to guidance in its response to the committee report we believe that it should take the opportunity in this legislation to include in the bill clear obligations for signposting to support and information for all applicants lastly there are also concerns around the low level data collection as I've touched on in section 15 knowing the impacts of this bill positive, negative and neutral is essential as it stands the data collection and reporting mechanisms outlined are not comprehensive enough to allow for proper evaluation of the impacts of this legislation and should be strengthened in closing trans people have already been waiting for far too long for these changes they deserve nothing less than good legislation that allows them to be recognised for who they are and in which everyone can have confidence Scottish Labour are determined to ensure we get that to scrutinise this legislation and ensure it meets its objectives and delivers the change trans people need and deserve Thank you very much indeed Presiding Officer it really gives me great pleasure to rise from my party in support of this important bill I am glad we are finally here it has been a long and painful road not least for those who are right now being harmed by the gender recognition act as it stands and I want to offer my thanks to the First Minister for getting us to this point it has been a long time coming support for these reforms was first included in four party manifestos in the 2021 election and all our respective manifestos at the election before that the passage of time since then has allowed these reforms to become the subject of myth and hyperbole in our communities that is deeply regrettable it is now encumbered upon all of us to debate these issues with compassion and sensitivity and to remember what is being proposed in this bill is simply a technical amendment to law it is always right and vitally important to hear the widest possible range of views when it comes to changing legislation as a liberal I believe in the right of everyone to speak their mind to express their opinions you shouldn't censor people but instead you should seek to meet their arguments and with evidence but let me be clear from the outset we cannot allow this debate to be hijacked by those who would question the very existence of the trans community or who fear and vilify them and would seek to prevent their access to equal rights to come on to the bill itself liberal democrats passionately believe in the rights of everyone to express the fullness of who they are freely and unencumbered by unnecessary scrutiny interference or abuse and the right that trans people are forced to seek permission to be who they are but the original legislation currently asks that of them given the many challenges they face in almost every aspect of their lives we should seek to make the recognition of their identity on the documents that they are required to hold the very least of their concerns we certainly have the power to do that we cannot allow the original act we have all heard the many troubling accounts of the damage caused by the current process the unnecessary anxiety and pain that that process exacts on those who go through it and that's why liberal democrats have long been persuaded of the case for reform so let's unpack the reform that we are talking about and what it will mean the current process to obtain a gender recognition certificate is dehumanising and both financially and emotionally costly for trans people it involves submitting evidence of having lived continuously in their proposed gender for a minimum of two years and then having to wait anxiously while their identity is debated by five strangers who they will never meet if their decision goes against them they have no right of appeal this legislation is solely about making that process quicker and more humane the humanity of trans people I would like to address the subject of women's safety as it pertains to this bill it is absolutely vital to state for the avoidance of all doubts that no part of this legislation will make it easier for a man to access a women's space a gender recognition certificate allows for a trans person's birth certificate to be changed I can think of no venue or establishment which requires the presentation of a women's safety certificate to validate entry indeed neither certificate can be used to prove identification and no permit or ID is currently required of anyone to enter any sort of gender specific space this legislation changed nothing in that regard I will Brian Whittle I really appreciate the member giving way and I can't disagree with anything the member says and I'd like to put it on record I'm looking for equality here but to the question I put to the cabinet secretary earlier on it really worries me because sport is already struggling to deal with transgender women at the moment and they're all over the place and my point is that we need to make sure we create legislation that protects everybody and it's really important in the face of the bill that we protect women's sport in this because if we look at Caitlyn Jenner who the very celebrated trans woman who's brought trans women's rights to the fore he was Bruce Jenner in 1976 when he won the Olympic championship his view you cannot allow transgender women to compete in women's sport Alex Cole-Hamilton Presiding Officer may I have the time back as much as I can I'm grateful for the intervention this is a matter for governing bodies in sport this is not a matter for this piece of legislation and I think that frankly that is a distraction from what we're trying to do which is actually to make the lives and the lived experience of the people in our community who are trans easier my party has satisfied that the proposals in the bill which create that new criminal offence for the making of a false declaration provide a deterrent to anyone seeking to abuse the system this is a safeguard that has worked well in those countries that have gone before us the spaces that are cited by those who oppose reform are protected by many safeguards, personal judgement and assessment there is no challenge to any of those protections in the pages of this bill Presiding Officer I am fully aware of the fact that as a man I do not live with the inherent fear and anxiety that many women so often feel with regard to their personal safety in our society a huge amount still needs to be done so that women feel safe in public but while that discussion is one we need to address in the round and with urgency it is not the forum for that vital debate it deserves its own active parliament it is important to note that the stage 1 report of the committee that scrutinised this bill and I commend their work for it said and I quote when asked about evidence of abuse and concerns no witness was able to provide concrete examples let's be clear any threat to women does not come from trans people but as the cabinet secretary said herself but from predatory and abusive men we do not need a licence or any form of certification to abuse women trans women also fall victim to those same offenders and they are twice as likely to be a victim of violent crime than the average person Presiding Officer in closing at its core this legislation is about human rights it is about respecting the dignity and the autonomy of transgender people who have been waiting far too long for these reforms which is why I and my party thank you we move to the open debate and I call Fulton McGregor to be followed by Jamie Greene thank you Presiding Officer and it really is a great privilege to speak in this debate today as a member of the committee scrutinising this legislation I can assure the chamber that this process was robust as the convener has said we heard from a whole range of people in organisations with varying views on the bill and I'd like to thank everybody who gave us evidence because despite what we might sometimes see in social media I'm sure all the committee members will agree that it was done in a very very respectful manner and of course like the convener's done I think it's important that we pay tribute to the clerks for their amazing and tireless work on this bill they really have been exceptional Presiding Officer this third committee process also compliments the fact that the Scottish Government ran two consultations on this as the cabinet secretary has herself already outlined but why do we need this bill well we all know that trans men and women are among the most stigmatised people in our country and many find the current system for obtaining a GRC to be intrusive and demeaning and there's certainly no doubt that we heard that directly from those people on committee actually some very harrowing evidence at times this bill does not give trans people any new rights nor does it change the 2010 Equality Act it simply makes the process of obtaining a GRC much simpler less degrading and more humane for trans people this is an already often stigmatised group that already have poorer health outcomes than the general population and hate crimes against trans people are increasing year on year this already marginalized group need their parliament to stand up for them and we can do that by making this very small change that could impact greatly on their lives it is perhaps then obvious why all parties in this chamber have had a commitment to change the GRC in their manifesto at some point and many of us here stood on that in the last election because at the core we all of us, every one of us in here believe in human rights and trans rights are human rights Presiding Officer there's been a lot of talk about what the bill does and does not do and despite the best intentions of individuals and organisations misinformation can quickly circulate the primary thing the bill does is remove the need for a gender recognition panel and a medical diagnosis Ruth McWire I thank Fulton MacGregor for taking an intervention I wonder when the committee were doing the scrutiny if they found out under the current system that's being done away with how many people are actually refused a GRC and what the reasons are for those refusals Fulton MacGregor I thank the member for an intervention I'll come back to that a wee bit but I would direct the member to the committee report which is very detailed saying in evidence we heard some quite widespread support for the removal of a gender recognition panel and a medical diagnosis from the SHRC, Rape Crisis Scotland the Church of Scotland and many others it's also very much in line with the WHO's redefinition of gender identity related health and in line with many other countries including Ireland, Norway and New Zealand the bill also reduces the period someone has to live in the required gender from two years to three months we did have some concerns over the phrase acquired gender but ultimately in this answer with McGuire's earlier intervention we did we found it difficult to find an alternative phrase and accepted it had a legal basis we also agreed by majority the period should be reduced but we weren't clear initially why three months was selected and I do welcome the Government's response to this the bill also lowers the age of eligibility to apply for a GRC from 18 to 16 I've already taken one intervention apologies I think it's fair to say that this was one of the most contested of the bill with strong arguments for both age ranges and I was pleased actually that the cabinet secretary reflected this in our evidence tours when talking about how the Government came to decision and it's referred also from Alex Cole-Hamilton the bill also introduces a new criminal offence to make a false statutory declaration or false application with a punishment for up to two years and or a fine and although we had some reservations about that I think that we would also hope that this would be an additional safeguard moving forward and Presiding Officer, now turn to some of the concerns that were raised these are strongly held and I do not think they should be easily dismissed I think it dilutes our own process if we do that and committee we didn't do that and ask the questions of witnesses that you would expect and I hope that that committee process will help to build up consensus as we move forward in the relation to the rights of women and girls in single sex spaces we were convinced after a lot of questioning that this bill simply does not have the remit to affect these no one in this place would want this to be the case and I know this Government is fully committed to protecting women's rights we heard from a lot of organisations that told us there would be no impact including in gender, amnesty and NUS Scotland and here is a quote from the Children's Commissioner which I think captures it we should have a lot of discussion about strengthening protections against individuals who are at risk rather than implying a whole category of people poses a risk and restricting their rights end quote also in respect of sports bodies can already make restrictions and this bill will have no impact on that again reassuring our direct Brian Whittle to the report as well of some relation to the impact in prisons the SPS were very clear that there would be no impact and told us in our gender identity and gender reassignment policy we take an individualised approach in other words things are taken on a case by case basis if the impact in prisons however is an area of concern going forward then Lucy Hunter Blackburn gave us a possible amendment to think about when she told committee it's one of these things to fix the bill could be amended to say that a GRC is not effective in prison at prison allocation decisions that would leave things back to where we want them to be in the hands of the people who make those decisions it's a relatively fixable part of the bill and that brings me on to a final point I'm not going to have time, apologies if we vote for this at stage 1 today then I know that committee as well as Government will door ahead of stage 2 as we all want to build consensus and make law as good as it can be Presiding Officer, in conclusion for any of my colleagues across the chamber thinking of not voting for this today I would simply ask why yes there is still a lot of work to be done and hopefully by working together we can make improvements and build further confidence but at its core this bill is narrow and only really impacts one group of people a group already marginalised and that impact we heard would be positive some people have done it without experience and negative impacts some people are worried about and so why shouldn't we Scotland is not somehow inferior to these other nations trans people in Scotland like everywhere else deserve their parliament to stand up for them and I'm sure many will be watching today hoping we can do just that this bill won't impact a great number of people but it will mean a great things for a few people and I strongly encourage everyone to vote for stage 1 and let all voices come together thank you I call Jamie Greene to be followed by Karen Adam thank you sometimes politics is about following your heart today I'm going to speak from mine too I want to share with you the things that I know and the things that I don't know here's what I do know I know what it feels to grow up feeling different I know what it feels not to understand why you feel different I know what it feels to turn to for help or advice I know what it feels like to be told that how you feel is just the phase or that it is somehow to be suppressed or even worse that you are immoral or delusional or mentally ill destined to a life of misery I know what it feels like to be threatened to be marginalised, to be bullied and to be discriminated against so I did say directly to the trans people in the chamber today I hear you and I want to make things better for you, that is my commitment to you today but here's what I don't know I don't know what it feels like to have fought for centuries for equality in a male misogynistic world I don't know what it feels like to suffer violence at the hands of a man I don't know what it feels like to be the victim of sexual violence or to seek solace in safe spaces I don't know what it feels like to compete in professional sport playing in an unfair field I don't know what it feels like to have a young daughter and hold genuine concerns about her welfare in public spaces or single sex spaces so I say to those of you who have written to me in great volume I hear you too because that really is the dilemma that we face today the undeniable need to improve the lives of trans people whilst protecting the rights of others we also need to pass good law that onus is on us without unintended consequences something we're actually not very good at in this place if I'm quite honest with you I do not envy the Scottish Government here but also I do not have much sympathy for it because they've managed to feel so much anger on the sides of those who both support and oppose reform at the same time let me be clear outcomes for trans people in Scotland are shockingly poor shocking, poor access to medical health poor access to physical and mental health high rates of suicide and self-harm and a failure to tackle growing transphobia this bill fixes none of that perhaps it should the debate around this has been undoubtedly toxic over the years and there is a spectrum of views we know that those who believe that the Government is not going far enough for example by the exclusion of non-binary people from it and those who are vocalising valid concerns which have been largely ignored but there are also those who are I think barely thinly hiding transphobia amongst some of those concerns if we were honest I actually think most people want to do the right thing for everyone in Scottish society but equally I cannot feel a help but feel an air of sadness in some of the arguments being used against reform to gender recognition which are often word for word the same arguments that are used against the age of consent, against gay rights against same sex marriage and against same sex adoption decades, decades later are now being used to justify academic arguments about why this bill is wrong and those who support it are also wrong we have come such a long way in Scotland in our equality rights I'm really proud of the progress we've made this does feel to me a little bit like the last great hurdle all of that being said however I need to be honest I have some reservations about the bill as it is currently drafted I have concerns about the interactions between this bill and other people's rights freedoms and equalities I do not think they have been fully considered or addressed by the Government as is evident by the debate today this is evident by the schisms and view between the AHRC and the Scottish Government's interpretation of that guidance who admit themselves we recognise the need for more guidance on the use for example of exceptions in same sex spaces guidance isn't good enough for everyone that is clear the bill must be clear about that and it must be addressed as the bill progresses through the Parliament I also have more generally wider problems with inconsistencies in how the law treats those of ages 16 and 17 the law says they can vote but they can't gamble the law says they can serve in the army but they can't drink alcohol to celebrate it and now we're being asked that they should be able to self identify gender and seek medical intervention and the lifelong implications that that sometimes brings to people I've had professionals email me and say this is utter madness you cannot let that happen and trans people write to me begging me pleading me please support this we need this and we have the right to do this I will be honest with you I don't know what the answer to that is because everyone is an individual but what must happen is the Government must be led by evidence they must do the right thing for young people which both protects them and it must protect them but also respect their soundness of mind I also see why concerns have been raised about the three month period of living in acquired gender as it is or as some have pointed out what does that even mean it does seem a big jump from two years to three months I understand that I understand that people have problems with that but I also understand that people think this is a good move which treats people with more dignity and respect I ask perhaps is there a compromise to be had in that respect and I also understand why some people put great faith in the solemnity and gravity of statutory declarations they see it as a safeguard but there are others who see it as little more as a paper it is written on safeguards are absolutely vital in this conversation but let me be clear predatory trans people are not the problem predatory men are the real problem here the law must be robust the law must be robust in dealing those who use the process of changing their gender with mal intent if this bill is not clear about that it should be we will help you fix that these are all issues that are rightly being debated today I want to thank my leadership and colleagues for allowing me to express my own personal views even though they may differ from theirs I don't expect didn't expect much applause today because that's not what I'm after what I'm after today is to make good law as we all should I want to close by sharing two very important beliefs that I hold that are very important to this debate they're personal to me the first is that I do not believe that being trans is a mental illness no more than being gay is a mental illness I support previous commitments publicly made by UK Conservative governments to remove this from the process if it's good enough for Theresa May and Penny Mordant then it's good enough for me the second is that the reform of this nature must be achieved in a way which betters the rights of everyone not degrades them a point eloquently made by engender and their submission to us I know there are strong views on this debate but these are problems that the government must fix it is their bill after all if they so need friends I will support the passage of this bill at stage 1 today because I owe it to a community which has given so much to me over the years and I urge colleagues to think very carefully about how they vote, those of us being granted that personal freedom to make that choice ourselves and those who are being whipped into a party position a position I do not envy I will end in a warning this cannot end up a dog's dinner of a bill which simply divides people by the mothering of anyone I want it to instead bring us together under one common goal of making every single Scott feel safe, feel welcome and feel included, every single one of us I know that's easier said than done I wish the government luck because listening to today's debate they're going to need it I call Karen Adam to be called by Paul O'Kane Thank you, Presiding Officer and to my colleague Jamie Greene some of the things she said that you don't know I do and I'm honoured to have the privilege to talk from that point of view today Presiding Officer, this is a wonderful day a day where I can stand here in this chamber and take part in shaping legislation which will improve the lives of citizens in Scotland who are some of the most marginalised misunderstood and vilified people in our society The progress Scotland was making in a world leader in human rights has undoubtedly been hindered by a campaign of fear and misinformation against the trans population trans people continue to suffer poorer outcomes relative to the wider population and we have the opportunity to do something which takes a small step to improve those outcomes The Scottish Government must and is working to promote the rights of everyone, disabled people baying people LGBTQ plus people and women to protect them from discrimination and we as lawmakers and public figures have a duty to work to end the stigma and prejudice that is often experienced in this context particularly for trans people so that they feel safe, secure and accepted in our society my goodness, they need it we all know our minds why are trans people any different in that if they don't then perhaps a deep reflection on that internal bias must surely be addressed and that discrimination confronted they should be trusted to make decisions about their own bodies and it should be a fundamental given right to have bodily autonomy and to have the freedom to take space up in this world without being impeded by anyone else The gender recognition reform bill does not even introduce any new rights for trans people in the trauma associated with the process of obtaining a gender recognition certificate simplifying the administrative process to gain legal recognition which has been a right for 18 years this is such a small change but a change to remove barriers gate keeping and that impeding that I spoke of this bill would de-medicalise the process which is nothing new moving to a system based on freedom, choice and respect personal declaration rather than medical diagnosis will bring Scotland into line with well established systems in Norway, Denmark, Ireland and recent reforms in Switzerland and New Zealand In 2018 Scotland was hailed as a world leader on human rights and on our inclusion for our LGBT plus citizens for things such as inclusive education but I believe that if we don't pass this bill we will be behind the times something crucial to this debate is adding the voices of trans people themselves and I would urge everyone in this chamber to do so reach out to the quality network and the Scottish trans alliance or like I did when I had questions about the community I went directly to them I asked if I could hear from them who had lived experience I was able to connect with trans people and listen to them and their stories unfortunately with some true heroin accounts which were only experienced because they were trans and I want to sincerely thank them for putting themselves in the position of having to relive their trauma so they could help others Presiding Officer just before we came into chambers I had the opportunity to go out and talk to some trans people and just as I was leaving I was pulled aside and spoken to and I was thanked for listening and when I was chatting to this person just as I was leaving they said oh by the way my name is Ross and I couldn't believe it I said my speech today has a quote by you in it and just by that chance meeting it really deepened my resolve in what I must do to work harder for our trans siblings so I'm going to read out the quote from Ross I would feel safer with a GRC but the current process risks re-traumatising me because of harm already inflicted by psychiatrists when I first told a psychiatrist I was trans as a teenager they prescribed me electroconvulsive therapy the harm this did meant I didn't feel safe to come out again and transition until I was in my 60s for the sake of my mental health I can never again allow some authority figure who doesn't know me to decide whether I am who I say I am Ross when we make law in this chamber surely the best laws are made with the lived experiences and the people effects being at the core of it we know that laws made before women's voices were included discriminated against us but they were detrimental to us we are all human and deserve rights which help us not hinder us trans people are entitled to have human rights they are as valid as you and me and everyone here they are entitled to protection and validation and support in law and given any opportunity to have that equal footing we should all have that without discrimination thank you I call Paul O'Kane to be followed by John Mason thank you I'm pleased to have the opportunity to contribute to this important stage 1 debate of the Bill in rising to speak I'm pleased to follow colleagues who have made contributions that are constructive and respectful in tone particularly Karen Adam, Pam Duncan-Glancy and Jamie Greene and I recognise all too well the truth that Jamie Greene opened with I do want to focus my contribution on the Bill before us however at the outset of my speech I do want to make comment on the public discourse about the Bill and around the Bill over the last few years the tone of the debate has reflected poorly on our nation it has been divisive and toxic in the vacuum created by the legislative process being delayed interpretation of the Bill has led to conversations that have been hurtful and damaging and largely related to the Bill and what the Bill does not do I believe that there has been too much heat and not enough light in his important and deeply considered book building a bridge the Jesuit priest Father James Martin considers how we must build bridges of respect, compassion and sensitivity between those who have come to fundamentally different viewpoints he speaks in the context of a bridge between LGBT people in the Catholic Church hence my interest in his work but he speaks about fundamental truth that can be transposed he speaks about the use of names naming and respecting the fundamental dignity of every human person he speaks about the way we describe a person calling them what they asked to be called he talks about respecting identity and humanity he speaks about not applying generic pejorative terms to whole groups of people no matter how much we fundamentally disagree because the rhetoric has let's be honest dangerously veered often into transphobia and homophobia too even in public life such as the corridors of this place or in our council chambers that's always unacceptable and must be addressed and I also recognise there are people who have views that are sincerely held and should not be described in pejorative terms as part of one larger group we all have a duty to conduct our discussion better particularly in online spaces perhaps I am naive, Presiding Officer but I do continue to believe in building that bridge but it requires respect, compassion and sensitivity I will turn to the bill in our 2021 manifesto the Scottish Labour Party committed to reforming the gender recognition act to demediclize the process of applying for the gender recognition certificate this is a manifesto commitment that we were elected on and a pledge to trans people who are one of the most marginalised groups in society as we have heard from colleagues already today and so in supporting reform of the gender recognition act I am proud to support party policy but also the position of LGBT Labour which has been in existence for over 40 years and affiliated to the Labour Party since 2002 I'm also following in the footsteps of Labour parliamentarians such as Kezia Dugdale our former Labour leader and my predecessor in the west of Scotland Mary Fee who proudly championed the rights of trans people in this chamber and continues to advocate for reform of the gender recognition act from outside of this Parliament of course I understand and appreciate that some people have raised their concerns with aspects of the bill in its current form and that's why it's incumbent on all members of this Parliament seriously to properly scrutinise the legislation at its further stages and to ensure that it is fit for purpose and protects the rights of all Scottish Labour believes that reforms must de-mediclise the process and that the process for application for a GRC set out in the current act should be replaced with something that is more accessible and dignified, administrative in nature and is not overly complex Presiding Officer, the bill details who can apply for gender recognition certificate and who the application will be made to but it does not specify the form the application will take and I do think that clarity on this is extremely important in order to provide confidence to all and as we've already heard from my colleague Pam Duncan-Granty we will seek to work with the Government in that space If I may turn to the equality act which has already been referenced in a number of contributions today the equality act is one of Labour's proudest achievements in government it protects both women and trans people from discrimination along with, as Pam Duncan-Granty outlined disabled people, gay people and a variety of other protected characteristics That is why as the bill proceeds Scottish Labour will take action to ensure that it is clear in the legislation that for the avoidance of doubt protections in the equality act remain in place We will scrutinise the bill with an intensity as it continues to make its progress through Parliament and it is important that this bill is robust and commands confidence not only in this chamber but out with this chamber in the wider public Presiding Officer we must not lose sight of what the purpose of the bill is this is about giving trans people the right to live their life with dignity and respect In coming to a close from a broad perspective the general principles of the gender recognition reform bill is outlined I believe will improve the lives of trans people in Scotland ensuring that they do not have to go through the current process to achieve a gender recognition certificate a process that is as we have heard already lengthy, traumatic and undignified but along with colleagues I respect the need to continue to work hard to scrutinise the legislation to try to build that bridge so that everyone can have confidence that we deliver legislation that will be respected I hope that that is a shared objective that we can all work together to achieve as the bill progresses Thank you Presiding Officer Thank you Mr O'Cain I now call John Mason to be followed by Maggie Chapman up to six minutes please Mr Mason Thank you very much and I'm very grateful for the opportunity to speak in today's debate I guess I'm here to represent something of a minority view within the SNP who are not entirely happy with this bill Yes, it is government policy however, as I suspect in other parties too there are a range of views within our party on this topic and can I particularly mark my respect and admiration for Ash Regan who has resigned over this today I should probably say that within the SNP those who are considering voting against the bill at stage 1 are doing so for slightly different reasons from each other so I'm not speaking for or on behalf of anyone in particular but I will try and cover some of the main concerns I think I won't, if you don't mind I think I've got a slightly niche area to deal with I'll see where we get to later on When I started thinking more about this issue some time ago a couple of key words that came to me at that point were truth and love From a Christian faith perspective one of our key beliefs is that we don't care for every single individual person and many others with no faith angle would completely agree with that Every person on this planet is of equal worth and deserves to be valued and that includes people we strongly disagree with or who are different from us in a variety of ways so as others have said the tone of the debate today and beyond is important and so far I think it has been quite good we may disagree as to the best way forward on gender recognition but we all respect each other for genuinely held beliefs as to what is best for all of our society and for the people who have questions about their gender so my first theme was love and care for each person but my second word is truth we all might and probably do want the world to be different from what it is we want less poverty, fewer wars and so on most of us are in politics to try and change these things but certain things we need to accept as scientific or medical facts the earth goes round the sun once a year, days are shorter in winter these are facts whether we like them or not and we have to accept them and as I understand it to be a fact there are two sexes, male and female each person is born on a certain day in a certain place and with a certain mother all of which is recorded on a birth certificate and a person's biological sex is discovered on that day earlier if we were using scans that that biological sex cannot be changed and it is important especially for healthcare rights going forward in life when it comes to gender there is much less agreement as to what that actually means some would say it is the same as sex and that probably used to be the case in the past but words can and do change their meanings over time and I for one would personally see gender as a much more fluid concept with different people understanding it in different ways I personally am relaxed about that so by all means people can dress as they want have relationships with whom they want call themselves whatever gender they want but let us not let that undermine the fact pleasant or unpleasant that their sex was discovered at birth and cannot change moving it on then to another angle in this debate and that is the impact on women for hundreds of years in this country and around the world there is a second class citizens in the home at work especially when it comes to pay in the political field and sadly when it comes to physical and other forms of abuse in the home and beyond I am glad to say that we have made some progress in this regard although not nearly as much as we should have and frankly in some other countries including Iran the position and treatment of women is frankly appalling now it has been argued that this build does not change the position of women to impact their rights in any way however what it certainly does do is increasingly blur the distinction between men and women if it becomes less clear as to who is a man and who is a woman then almost inevitably it becomes more difficult to ensure that women are paid equally are equally represented in Parliament or elsewhere and it becomes more difficult to ensure that women have access to safe spaces including prisons where they can be reasonably certain that no men will be present because let's make no mistake about it as has been said already it is men, people who's biological sex at birth was male who are a consistently a threat to women be that physically, mentally or emotionally just to choose one statistic I picked up in domestic abuse cases 92% of those being prosecuted were male so clearly it is important to know who is male and who is female therefore although in the face of it considered to only deal with some technical issues pertaining to gender recognition certificates and the like it does also send out a wider message of course this is true of much legislation we pass an actual law but we are also sending out a wider message for example we banned smoking in public places but we were also sending out the message that smoking is harmful to health and should be reduced we put a minimum price in alcohol partly to send out the message and we should all cut down and we passed the hate crime legislation to send out the message that our attitudes towards each other need to improve and we all need to become more tolerant so in the same way I fear that this legislation has passed would send out the message that the distinctions between male and female are not really relevant and that in turn would undermine our efforts to ensure that women have their rightful place in our society and the trans community is not totally united on this I have met a range of people over time and a number do support a broad continuation of the present system they would argue that gender dysphoria is a recognised condition and that it can and should be independently assessed so for all of these reasons I am very much afraid that I cannot support this bill thank you I now call Maggie Chapman to be followed by Tess White up to six minutes please Ms Chapman thank you in the history of this Parliament today will be remembered for the first time after far, far too long we have the opportunity to do something something on one level rather ordinary and yet something immensely precious today we assert the simple right of all trans people with dignity and respect without unnecessary intrusion expense, medicalisation or stigma to ensure that their documents of identity accurately record that very identity so if they choose to marry the person they love they can stand beside them as who they really are and at the end of their lives they know that that life that that death will be recorded as their own not those of a non-existent stranger something ordinary something simply human but brought about by some extraordinary human endeavours we owe a great debt today to our trans and non-binary friends colleagues, comrades and relatives those who have campaigned and explained written, sung, painted marched, prayed and believed today is for you we see you and we thank you but it is also for those trans people we've never met never heard of or never heard from we've never been able to write to their MSP respond to a consultation maybe never told anyone that they are trans maybe scarcely even told themselves wherever we are wherever you are today today is for you we acknowledge you and we keep a place for you today is for our children and young people those with support of families who struggle alongside them and those whose relatives have turned away we look to the future a time when being trans or being cis is simply a facet of being human like being gay or straight, left or right handed today is for you we welcome you and we stand with you and today is for our trans friends and neighbours those known to us and those unknown to anyone who are no longer with us who chose not to live in a world that couldn't or wouldn't see them for who they were we grieve for you and we hold you in our thoughts we don't forget those elsewhere in the UK who have had their promises of reform cruelly trampled by a toxic government that would rather play at culture wars than keep its word today may not be for you but tomorrow I hope will be this bill has been assailed by a tsunami of disinformation a part breaking moral panic manufactured and disseminated by a small number of people who should know better I believe that many will come to know better will bitterly regret the part they have played in this process I implore them to show courage not the empty bravado that dresses in appropriated colours the lighting in the discourse of disrespect but the real courage that looks with meticulous attention on our history and our oppression recreated recognises shared experience and is not afraid of difference today is not for you but it could be there is still time to join us we are not yet where we want to be this bill itself does not do everything we want it to do some of those gaps can potentially be filled in the stages ahead of us I make no secret and no apology for calling for both three month waiting and reflection periods to be taken out of the bill for a reconsideration of the problematic person with an interest provisions for the removal of the redundant and stigmatising new criminal offence and for proper end of life provisions to be secured some of the gaps will take longer to fill we need new laws new processes we need this particularly to those in the gallery or listening online who I know are directly affected by this I am determined that appropriate gender recognition for under 16s and for non binary people will be part of our shared future you are not forgotten and gender recognition is of course not the only imperative we must and we shall with urgency and resolve ensure that trans healthcare is available to all who need it when and where they need it and we must and we shall comprehensively ban the despicable practices of so-called conversion no before I close I would just like to put on record my heartfelt thanks to my fellow committee members for their thoughtful work over the last few months I thank Joe Fitzpatrick for guiding us through the stage 1 process with consideration and care and most importantly I want to thank all of those who gave evidence to us in person or in writing even those with whom I profoundly disagree but I do especially want to mention the trans people and their families who spoke and wrote so movingly thank you for making yourselves vulnerable for sharing your experiences your lives with us Presiding Officer in closing this bill does something simple it makes it easier than the current process for trans people to be legally recognised as who they are in the words of Ellie Gommasall a young trans woman who spoke to the committee and said at the rally held outside parliament this afternoon sometimes it feels like the hardest thing about being trans is the admin this bill changes that and only that as others have said this bill has been a very long time coming and we know there is still a long way to go but today together we set our path in the right direction and we do so in solidarity with gratitude and with love thank you Ms Chapman I now call Tess White to be followed by Michael Marra up to six minutes please Ms White Presiding Officer women are watching today I hope the SNP is listening at the heart of this matter is how we make trans people safe without affecting the safety of women and girls that's the policy question that we as elected politicians must answer it's fair and it's a balanced framing of the issue but simply for asking that question women including the likes of J.K Rowling are being vilified their treatment throughout this process has been disgraceful how are policy makers and members of the public supposed to scrutinise this legislation or any legislation when they risk being maligned for doing so it is our role and it is our duty to examine the consequences unintended or otherwise of the laws we make as we reflect on the general principles of the bill we must reflect too on the political and public discourse that has surrounded it and we must learn from it Presiding Officer the SNP have been attempting to reform the Gender Recognition Act for half a decade despite taking additional time to review its approach there has been little material change that was first consulted on by the Scottish Government in 2017 and the bill we are debating today following a second consultation and a delay due to Covid the SNP Green Government bulldozed ahead ignoring the SNP's own manifesto commitment to work with women on the reforms until pressure from critical media coverage forced their hand was hastily arranged with women's interest groups but the bill had already been finalised it was a tokenistic gesture the Equalities and Human Rights Commission urged caution in January this year calling for a more detailed consideration given the potential consequences of reform for data use competitive sport barriers facing women and the criminal justice system meanwhile Nicola Sturgeon dismissed women's views about the bill as not valid a far cry from the maximum consensus the Scottish Government originally said it was seeking there are fundamental issues with the bill's approach including lowering the minimum age of application to 16 removing the need for medical evidence and reducing the period that applicants must live in their acquired gender there are of course serious implications for the safety of women in single sex spaces the bill is also scant on detail the Scottish Government is still unable to tell us precisely what it means to live in the acquired gender for three months we still don't know how it is possible to prove a false declaration without the individual confessing to it a redundant deterrent for misuse and what of the cross border implications of the bill the equality in human rights commission has warned that it may be difficult for trans people with Scottish GRCs to be certain of their legal status in England and Wales the law is supposed to provide clarity not question marks Presiding Officer I've worked at a senior level in HR for more than 30 years inclusion and diversity are deeply ingrained in my personal and professional outlook so too is safety the Scottish Government has done nothing nothing to convince me or many others that this legislation will not negatively impact the safety of women and girls but also the safety of young people questioning their gender identity another wrote to me this week imploring me to consider the implications of this bill for young people drawing on the incredibly difficult experience of her own daughter she described the legislation as a sticking plaster and highlighted the need for a profoundly improved supportive mental health care for children and adolescents exploring their gender identity removing a diagnosis of gender dysphoria does not diminish the distress that a 16 year old can experience in this situation but it does risk removing the safeguards and clinical support available to them should this bill pass I deeply regret that the Scottish Government will not wait for the full publication of the CAS review before proceeding with the parliamentary passage of this legislation especially with the closure of the Tavistock Centre in London next spring the intent behind the gender recognition reform bill may be good but the unintended harm could be greater for that reason together with the implications for the rights and safety of women and girls I will vote against this bill at decision time and it's shameful that MSPs from other parties apart from Ash Reagan who show tremendous courage who share my concerns cannot do the same thank you thank you Ms White I now call Michael Marra to be followed by Emma Roddick up to six minutes please Mr Marra thank you Presiding Officer transgender people are not new as long as there have been people there have been those who do not subscribe those who fit those who do not feel those who simply are not the binary distinction of normative gender that many cultures have mapped far too closely on to the indisputable scientific genetic distinction of sex transgenderism can be seen in the relics of antiquity in Sumeria, in Greece, in Rome transgenderism has been prevalent in the villages of rural Siberia where environmental factors skewed the balance of the sexes trans visibility was noted by the symbolism of Weimar Republic and increasingly across much of the west and thankfully today in this country which affords rights and freedoms to all so transgender people transgenderism is not new what is new not at the moment I'll make some progress if I can what is new is the much wider availability of novel therapies and transition surgeries alongside limitless social media information and with these come possibilities for better lives for those who have suffered in silence or in anguish and they also bring significant risks especially when the pace of laws outstripped societal understanding Hegel in his phenomenology of the mind argued that the identity of the self is entirely dependent on its recognition by others public recognition and personal identity are intertwined for every single one of us and seeking legal recognition is no mere validation of personal affirmation it is a core function of the modern state and the expression of liberty yet biological sex remains the definitive organising fact of our state and our society from cradle to grave whether your child has two x chromosomes or a single x and y chromosome will define their health, their physical development their strength, their speed then society and culture wraps those things in a bundle of patriarchy and misogyny I will in a second in a bundle of patriarchy and misogyny and sex matters even more On that point there I thank the member for taking my intervention in terms of chromosomes we have intersex people that exist how does that match up with what you're saying Michael Marra I think it matches entirely there are people who are intersex who can have organs sexual organs from one or a mix of between the two but the core being of the genetic side of this is about two x's or an x and y that is the basis of the biology that is the basis of the biology no I won't, not on that point we can maybe discuss that at a later point then society and culture wraps those things in a bundle of patriarchy and misogyny and sex matters even more status, standing, wages whether you can walk home at night or wake the following morning whether you're raped, whether you require medical treatment in a system of education that trains doctors to understand your body as an aberration rather than as the majority women's sex based rights are often self-policed by recognition on site usually through avoidance and removing themselves from danger then there are more intimate settings where women are even more vulnerable in hospitals in prisons receiving intimate care where mental capacity is being diminished by age and disease women who have been the victims of violence from men and who are at risk of violence from men require the sex based protections afforded by the equality act this is almost never the case because of other women or because of trans people but overwhelmingly as other members have said because of the behaviours, attitudes and violence of men that runs through our culture and this debate is set against the context of a rising tide of misogynistic violence and many representations I've received from women ahead of this debate detailed well-founded concerns that have not been answered by this Government to date on their protections as guaranteed in the equality act that act, those protections that promise of security, progress and safety legislated for by a Labour Government must be guaranteed on the face of the bill Labour will seek to amend the legislation to that end so it's right today for progressive reform for trans recognition and for the chance to amend this legislation confidence in the new process for obtaining agenda recognition certificate is Parliament trans people should know that the process commands their own confidence and that of the wider public and the bill as drafted has very few safeguards to prevent it being abused by bad actors Scottish Labour believes that consideration should be given to how the application process can be strengthened in order to command the broadest possible public confidence I personally believe that a countersignatory process would help to build this confidence meaning that applications are not made in solitary isolation the comparable process would be changes to passports to which all citizens must adhere when amending their personal details the signature of another person that recognition is widely accepted and supported in this process and is a standard part of our day-to-day life such a signatory process properly developed and implemented could serve to better protect all parties recognition is in the end about how we relate to each other how we are seen in our community the bill currently proposes the reduction of the age restriction for gender recognition certificate applications from 18 to 16 years and I think the government has made a very poor job to date of answering critical questions posed in this area including those in Human Rights Commission and I believe that the significant development of the case for this change in the face of the risks would be necessary before it can command the necessary widespread public and political support I believe that is the job of Parliament to find common ground in the country to balance the need for reform and the need for protection of existing rights the struggle for recognition is a practice of freedom so say Wittgenstein, Foucault, Arendt that struggle is just yet the balance of rights and common protections can easily be tipped unamended this legislation will fail the test set by the First Minister herself that the rights of trans people and women can both be secured the government and this cabinet secretary have a very long way to go in the coming weeks before this legislation can meet that test Thank you Mr Marra and I now call Emma Roddick who will be the last speaker in the open debate up to six minutes please Ms Roddick Thank you I just want to first say that trans rights are human rights and as a woman I don't feel that they are in conflict with my own I am speaking today to defend the rights of others in the LGBTQI community to be who they are access to documentation which reflects gender is necessary for privacy for expression and for just living as what you are it's paradoxical to me that you have to live in your acquired gender for a period before accessing documentation that allows you to live in your acquired gender but I suppose listening to other contributions today it might need to be the next reform of the Gender Recognition Act that remedies that there should be nothing controversial about what we are actually discussing today we are simplifying a process which trans people have told us in great numbers and over a long period of time is humiliating and intrusive we are removing a medical aspect from an administrative process that has no reason to be there being trans is not an illness and our law needs to reflect that I have a member's business debate pending at the moment on mental health stigma and many of the points that I intend to raise then are relevant today into trans people the demedicalisation of the process to have trans identities recognised is something to do and it's overdue in a moment the WHO and the current edition of the ICD have already done away with this that the permission of doctors and panels is still required is an anachronism and it simply doesn't make sense for it to remain, I will take an intervention Sue Webber Marodic for taking the intervention does the member agree with the Scottish Government's own equality impact assessment on this bill that says we need more up-to-date research of our young people Emma Marodic I think that we need to do a lot of work on supporting particularly young trans people but trans people overall with their mental health and I'm sure that we will discuss that in detail when we discuss healthcare for trans people in future the Council of Europe report published in July outlined the need for steps to deep pathologise legal gender recognition and I agree with Karen Adam that we will be behind the times if we don't pass this bill because we are already behind the times this will let us catch up a little and nothing in front of us today is a new idea we are slowly, very slowly catching up with international best practice in fact whatever some would have you believe it's not even new to this country I remember sitting on my lunch break as a teenager with my phone out watching Shirley-Anne Somerville give a statement on forthcoming gender recognition reforms reforms which every party in this place today backed in their 2016 manifestos trans people have been promised these improvements for a long time and there is no justification for allowing it to drag on any longer I agree with various members of the opposition who have said that this debate should be respectful but I can't agree that it should remain respectful because it hasn't been we can't kid ourselves otherwise in the course of this afternoon alone I've heard certain members misgender repeatedly trans people that they're talking about I've heard outright denial of the legitimacy of transgender identities there's nothing respectful about transphobia and those things I have just described are transphobia I refuse to submit to claims that these statements are respectful just because they're said in a polite and even tone they are never respectful, they are hateful and I'll never be comfortable with them being spoken in a place like this I would like to make one personal reflection too as a survivor I'm still years into this debate horrified by the way that some people use my experience to justify transphobia I am traumatised but I don't blame trans people or believe that their right to privacy is any less or more important than my own my trauma is the fault of a cisgender man and he did not have to make a statutory declaration to legally change his gender in order to cause the harm that he did women have so many fights left to win on the route to equality fighting other women just because their experience looks different to your own gets you nowhere that today at least we're not discussing legislation that will allow legal recognition for non-binary identities I want to give special mention to my enby friends and I want to assure them that they're not forgotten I recognise the position that they are in I hope it is not too long before we see justice for them as a queer woman and as a current co-convener of the LGBTI CPG I will always stand by my non-binary neighbours and I will keep on raising their lack of recognition until they gain it I had an email only yesterday from a trans constituent which I'd like to end on they were grateful that they didn't have to worry about what I might respond with as one of their representatives and I'd like to share with you a small bit of the email because to me it sums up what we're here to do today and I think it's probably far more meaningful than anything I can come up with as a cisgender woman they said, this is not the first time pleading my humanity to strangers during the course of my transition I've had to subject numerous intimate details of my life for scrutiny and judgement it is always stressful and humiliating for me that's what these proposed changes to the process are about it fills me with hope to think of all the collective time, money and pain that this bill could spare I hope we do the right thing by my constituent today and in the further stages of this bill and that we keep in mind the trans people, the people this bill actually affects who are watching at home scrolling on Twitter for news or sitting in the gallery above us they have been waiting far too long for what many consider to still be far too little let's keep our promises to them thank you Ms Roddick we will now move to the closing statements and I call on Jackie Baillie to wind up on behalf of Scottish Labour up to six minutes please Ms Baillie the benefit of being in Parliament for a long time is that you have a relatively long institutional memory you've worked your way through literally hundreds of pieces of legislation sat through lengthy stage 2s explored what you can do with amendments reasoned or otherwise and you become skilled at negotiation both as a minister I can remember that long ago or indeed with ministers of the current government and yes you do even learn to compromise because our aim must be to have the very best legislation we can but with no second revising chamber and legislation often progressing at breakneck speed there is a particular responsibility on us in this Parliament to get it right that therefore means it is right to challenge it is right to debate the issues no matter how difficult that might be the gender recognition reform bill is both simple and complex in terms of legislation and it is in the nature of these things that there will undoubtedly be challenges in the courts the greater the complexity the greater the level of concern the greater the requirement for us as legislators to consider the provisions and their effect carefully and whether there are unintended consequences government has a responsibility to lead but they also have a responsibility to take the country with them but legislation is just one part of what the Government should do how they spend money how they set policy is equally important so let me turn to this specific debate and say very clearly at the outset I support the general principles of the bill but I have to say as others have done the name calling and insults that have characterised much of the discourse has been unwarranted and unhelpful so to the blanket assertions without much supporting evidence that simply do nothing to promote understanding or indeed the questions that are often asked of government but sometimes not fully answered they do nothing to reassure people with doubts and complex and difficult issues demand of us a thorough and mature approach concerns have been expressed from a variety of different perspectives we've heard them today some people are vehemently opposed to the bill and whilst I might disagree with them I will always listen to their point of view respectfully others are hugely supportive to their own experience or that of their children of gender dysphoria and the lack of access to services to support and actually the lack of recognition of who they are and of course there are those who are broadly supportive but are worried that they may well be unintended consequences so I want to address some of those concerns as this will be the area of focus indeed Jackson Carlaw and intend to abstain tonight I've heard compelling speeches from I think the one she's developing from Michael Marra from Pam Duncan Glancy and from Jamie Greene and I wonder if she would welcome an assurance from the cabinet secretary that they will be open to constructive amendment of this bill because frankly the record of the government on being open to amendments is not a strong one Fulton MacGregor has said the committee will be would she welcome that assurance Jackie Peary I welcome the brief intervention from the member and I do welcome what I think has been signalled by the cabinet secretary but I'm sure she will take the opportunity to do so in her closing speech that the government is open to that dialogue I really hope that that is the case and let me address some of the issues that I would like to see and let me start with the equality act the point was raised by a number of members and as I understand it the point is that the Scottish Government will apparently argue in court in relation to the Public Boards Act that a GRC changes someone's sex under the Equality Act of 2010 if that's the case the argument that is made is that the practical impact of that is things like single sex provision will effectively not exist now I understand that people want clarity on that point and I think it would be helpful if not today that the minister does address this women have specifically expressed concerns about the need to protect women-only services and spaces I think we recognise that women's rights have been hard fought for and hard won and as Pam Duncan-Glancy made the point all rights have been hard fought for and hard won but Scottish Labour do understand the strength of feeling on this issue and their desire to ensure that women's rights are protected we will therefore seek to amend the bill at stage 2 to respect the primacy of the equality act and have this placed on the face of the bill we also turning to gender recognition certificates absolutely understand that the point is to simplify and de-medicalise the process and I agree with this but the government has described who can apply for a GRC who they make their application to but there is no description of how and we will seek to clarify that at stage 2 as well let me turn to age and many people have expressed concerns all of us about whether 16 is the appropriate age and these are difficult issues and I don't necessarily know the answer to that but I am encouraged by the cabinet secretary's willingness to engage with Christine Grahame who raised the point first and indeed with others in the chamber about this Presiding Officer, I want to touch briefly on the CAS review into gender identity services for young people in England it's an interim report but it's finding should inform how we deliver treatment and services in Scotland and at the Sandiford clinic and I know and welcome the fact that health improvement Scotland have been tasked with developing national standards of care for Sandiford's young gender clinic but it won't be published until the end of 2023 now I'm sure the cabinet secretary will agree that our young people deserve the best possible medical care that is based on clinical research and best practice and we should urge the government to accelerate this process Presiding Officer, can I single out speeches in closing from across the chamber Jamie Greene, Karen Adams, Paul O'Kane far too many people to name they were powerful, they were personal contributions and they challenge us to think I believe reform is required and I will support the general principles of this bill but there is room for improvement let me say that Labour has a proud tradition of promoting equality and human rights we introduced the 1998 human rights act, the 2010 equality act and I am proud that it was Labour that repealed section 28 in this Scottish Parliament we will support this bill at stage 1 but the government must understand that they need to address the concerns outlined today if they wish to continue the command and to continue to command support right the way across this chamber thank you Ms Billy I now call on Pam Gozel to wind up on behalf of the Scottish Conservatives up to 7 minutes please Ms Gozel I am honoured to be closing this debate on behalf of the Scottish Conservatives I would like to begin by joining my colleagues across the chamber in thanking everyone from our witnesses to the clerks the organisations and constituents who took the time to write to me all of which I have taken into consideration as we have heard today the long views on both sides of this debate across the chamber and with this in mind due to the limited time and the significance of this debate I will not be using the traditional route of closing by summarising members' contributions and I will also emphasise that I will not be taking any interventions while I don't doubt the good intentions of those voting in favour of this bill the proposed law is a let down for women and girls faith communities and for children who require the protection of the law I said I wasn't taking the intervention the proposed bill is ill thought ill considered and most of all unpredictable it seeks to remove any medical oversight and opens the process to a group of unknown size and characteristics and maybe there is no perfect answer that would solve all the issues but don't we owe it to everyone whether they are trans or not religious or not female or not a child or not to spend longer seeking a fair way forward the vexed nature of this topic has seen those standing in opposition to bad legislation labelled transphobes however, as a member of the Equalities Committee I can say with confidence that I have given this bill due consideration the removal of the requirement for a medical diagnosis of gender dysphoria the reduction in the time lived in the acquired gender the lowering of the minimum age from 18 to 16 and the removal of the gender recognition panel strips the process of all current safeguards leaving in their wake a flimsy criminal offence for a false statutory declaration which is near impossible to improve among the tsunami of emails that I have received from my constituents there were several who had lived experience of struggling with a gender identity they urged me to vote against the bill today because they believe without the current safeguards they would have embarked on a life altering process as children the lowering of the minimum age is irresponsible especially when accompanied by the removal of medical oversight which the Scottish Council on human bioethics have urged against this is just one of the provisions that must be addressed should this bill go ahead to stage 2 the SNP Government are ignoring the significance of this bill on the equality act 2010 meanwhile the system is significant in the court they have repeatedly dismissed the wider implications of this bill on women of faith women and girls and more broadly which is something extremely close to my heart I am deeply concerned that this law has not been drafted with them in mind for example for women of faith when it comes to medical situations such as visiting a GP we are treatment by the opposite sex maybe a breach of religious practices or the sacrity of single sex spaces for a woman performing the partial washing in a public bathroom before their prayer they are already a marginalised group in our society and this legislation would prompt them to self exclude other from public life the committee has received evidence from heel survivors group and women who have felt compelled to self exclude from services offered under rape crisis Scotland because of its refusal to guarantee a women only environment I also have other constituents worried about whether an elderly woman can be guaranteed a female carer to help with washing and dressing which has justified fear since NHS Lothian said that was unable to guarantee female only care due to the privacy protections in section 22 Presiding Officer organisations that gave evidence to the committee such eGender Stonewall an equality network and even the cabinet secretary herself all argue as though the issues that GRC is necessary or gives a right to gain access to single sex services or spaces but the real concern here is that the change of sex under the quality act 2010 makes it easier for growing number of GRC holders to exchange exclusions for those places so can you understand why there are valid concerns the services providers are less likely to challenge anyone with a GRC in a female only space in conclusion Presiding Officer this bill departs significantly from the gender recognition 2004 act the Scottish Government has lost sight of the bill's original intention and produced what I consider to be a piece of legislation that begs for unintended consequences and legal challenge in light of the evidence presented here today the evidence I have heard in committee and the concerns of my constituents I will be voting against the bill at stage 1 and I urge members across this chamber to do the same Thank you Ms Gozo I now call on Shona Robison cabinet secretary to wind up on behalf of the Scottish Government up to 8 minutes please cabinet secretary Thank you Deputy Presiding Officer Can I first of all say that I think we have by and large continued with what is a respectful debate this afternoon we've had a range of views across the chamber in relation to the bill I want to also put on record again my thanks to the committee the convener and of course the clerks who have done a huge amount of work on the bill to this stage I want to refer us to as many people's contributions as I can but if I'm not able to cover them all I will try and follow up in writing cos some important points have been made that I want to try and cover I want to first of all turn to Pam Duncan Glancy and some of the points made by Jackie Baillie Let me very very clear I have felt that I've had an open door policy up to now and have met Pam Duncan Glancy on a number of occasions and have been trying to build consensus where I can so let me give a categorical assurance that as we move to stage 2 I will absolutely work with members across the chamber on constructive amendments and all a fair hearing and seek to build consensus where possible I would ask that they are constructive that they are in line with the principles of the bill and of course need to be legal and competent but I think we can get there and I want to reference 2 areas in particular so the equality act 2010 now I have said since the beginning of this process that this bill makes no impact on the equality act because obviously the equality act is a reserved matter but perception is also important and I recognise the concerns about that and as I've said as well that the single 6 exemptions under the equality act will remain regardless of this bill however putting this on the face of the bill I understand that it will help to leave that in no doubt whatsoever and I recognise the importance of that so I'm very willing to work with Pam Duncan Glancy and others to achieve that I'm happy to take Pauline McNeill Pauline McNeill and can I thank the cabinet secretary for what she said which she is constructive in the sense that's what Labour's asking for that on the face of the bill so I have to say I'm pleased about that cabinet secretary would also agree that it's important to get clarity in the Government's position and clarity in the law and some people have asked why the Scottish Government will argue in court that a GRC changes someone's sex under the equality act for the purposes of arguing on the public appointments board and that just seems to be at odds with what the cabinet secretary has said to Parliament if she could see there seems to be a contradiction it would be very helpful if you could clear that up cabinet secretary I'm not going to comment on a live court case as you wouldn't expect me to but the Scottish Government accepts and agrees completely with the equality human rights commission their definition of the protected characteristics under the equality act 2010 and the effect of a GRC none of that has changed since the 2004 act and none of it will change with this bill it remains exactly the same so I can give that that guarantee again the other area that I wanted to mention is about the process of application and again a point raised by Labour members and again I am happy to work with them and indeed others across the chamber to look at how we can perhaps address some of the concerns I thought Michael Marra made some quite useful suggestions around what that might look like so I am happy again to work across the chamber to look at how we can do that I also wanted to come back to an issue raised about access to healthcare support and as I said in response to the committee's report the Scottish government absolutely recognises the need to provide the best possible care for young people who are questioning their gender identity or experiencing gender dysphoria and we and NHS Scotland will of course closely monitor the on-going findings of the CAS review within the context of NHS Scotland's services as they become available alongside wider national and international evidence but we have to be clear that clinical decision making and clinical services are very different and have no relation to this bill this bill is about changing the process by which someone can obtain Agenda Recognition Certificate you don't require Agenda Recognition Certificate to access clinical services but we absolutely accept about those clinical services needing to improve and I think the Cabinet Secretary for Health has already made a commitment to work with the committee around those improvements that are already in the pipeline to be made to ensure that waiting times are reduced, yes Rachael Hamilton Within the response from the Scottish Government to the committee the Cabinet Secretary for Health did not commit at the moment to ask of the committee which was the review of the gender dysphoria services for children and young people and all people at the moment obviously there's a very long waiting time I recognise that this isn't part of the bill Cabinet Secretary but it was an important part of the evidence that we took that this should be that the waiting time should be reduced and services should be improved Thank you Back in December 2021 we were aware that the framework for services improvement was issued which includes commissioning a national clinical service for young people so there's already work going on and that will be informed by all the best practice clinical guidelines robust evidence on treatments and new models of delivery as such information becomes available and that will be inclusive of relevant developments in England the rest of the UK and internationally so I don't think there's any disagreement here and the Cabinet Secretary for Health is of course taking that forward I want to reference a few other comments that have been made I thought Alec Hold Hamilton made a good point about the difficult and lengthy process and why it puts so many people off and that's borne out by the evidence because of the estimated half a million trans people in the UK only around 6,000 currently have a GRC that says to me that there is a huge problem with the process and as I've said before the people who will take advantage of the new simplified process for obtaining a GRC will be those who have already been living in their acquired gender many for decades out of all of those people and that's the evidence from elsewhere who take advantage of the changed processes of people who have already been living in that acquired gender I thought Jamie Greene made a very powerful contribution he said that we're not talking about a mental illness here he talked about some of the concerns and the same arguments being used against other minorities over the decades and he's absolutely right and he talked about things that he doesn't know well let me speak as a mum of a teenage daughter and how my fear for her when she goes out at the weekend of whether she's going to come home okay and I'll secretly wait up to make sure she comes in the door is because of my concern about predatory and abusive men not trans people who are out on a Friday and Saturday night going about their business yes of course for the benefit of those who perhaps apologies for the benefit of those who didn't sit in the debate that's exactly the point I made of her baitham is that it's not predatory trans people it's predatory men but what I am saying is that whilst I'm pleased to support the minister and the government by lending my support in today's vote it's not without compromise it's very clear even within her own benches and those in the wider public that there is a bigger discourse still to be had there are still people who do feel their voices have not been fully heard in this I would like some commitment from the cabinet secretary that she will constructively engage not use the parliamentary majority that the government and parties have but constructively engage with every single member to ensure that what we do pass at stage 3 is worthy of this parliament cabinet secretary and in conclusion yes can I agree with Jamie Greene that's what I want I want to build consensus but of course that has to be around the principle of this bill that the current process for transgender people is not as it should be because it puts people off being able to obtain a gender recognition certificate and I think we've heard that across the chamber so what I want to do is to build the consensus that we can in order to try and make this bill the best and have the best law that we can as Jackie Baillie said yesterday and I will do that I've had an open door policy and I'm happy to work with Jamie Greene and Pam Duncan Glancy Jackie Baillie and others to be able to do that as far as we can and that's a commitment that I'd like to give at the end of this debate thank you thank you that concludes the debate on gender recognition reform Scotland bill at stage 1 it's now time to move on to the next item of business and there's one question to be put as a result of today's business and that question is the motion 6459 in the name of Shona Robison on gender recognition reform Scotland Bill at stage 1 be agreed are we all agreed the Parliament is not agreed therefore we'll be moving to a vote and there'll be a short suspension to allow members to access the digital voting system