Nicola Sturgeon’s carefully confected outrage at Alister Jack’s invoking of Section 35 of the Scotland Act of 1998 against the Gender Recognition Reform bill may have impressed her Green allies and sundry supporters of the bill. It has, however, been met with relief by the many who campaigned against this bill. Above all, there has been no significant groundswell of popular support for it. Having used the Supreme Court once to try to stir up support for a referendum, no doubt Ms Sturgeon will resort to the law once more. I have no idea how genuinely invested she is in the Green/Stonewall campaign on gender self-ID, but I am in no doubt that her uncompromising stance on the most controversial aspects of the bill have more to do with creating a standoff with the UK Government. It could all have been so different if the SNP had not positioned itself as the permanent opposition to the UK Government. Discussion between them of the issues, especially where they impinge on the Equalities Act, should have taken place, but for Ms Sturgeon and her allies, the confrontational approach is generally the first resort. This issue is indeed momentous. The implications for women and girls in their”safe spaces” are a matter of deep concern. Yet for the SNP this is overwhelmingly just the next stage in their long war of attrition to try to break up the UK. Jill Stephenson, Edinburgh.
These vans cost £600 per day, so 10 over the next few months would cost £6,000.
Please help, if you can!
- Reached well over 520,000 people with our website and newsletter that goes to all of Scotland’s pro-UK MSPs, MPs and organisations.
- Been featured by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation.
- Have run a ‘Holyrood 2021’ campaign that reached over 1 million people.
- Have been in the national and local press, numerous times.
- Been interviewed by the German TV Channel ARTE.
Following the UK Government’s decision to effectively block the SNP’s Gender Bill, there will be much orchestrated nationalist wail-ing and gnashing of teeth. I, for one, am grateful to the UK Government as I do not think the core reasons for the intervention -the safety of women and girls and the proposed new age limit – should be used as a political football. Making political capital out of such a matter is about as low as a politician or party could sink. But there is another aspect to this. If only one woman or girl is saved from the trauma of sexual attack, or worse, in a previously safe area, it is worth every ounce of effort to prevent the Bill becoming law. Alexander McKay, Edinburgh.
The reaction of Nicola Sturgeon to the Government’s veto of her Bill -that it would be the “first of many” -was ridiculous. Such an order cannot be made any time the Government feels like it, but only if a Bill would be incompatible with international obligations or it changes the law so as to adversely affect the operation of the law. Like everything, the process is subject to judicial review. Robert Edwards, Hornchurch, Essex.
For too long First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has had a free rein to sow her seeds of division across our proud nation, with her flowers of division now blooming. At last the UK Government has shown some backbone by making use of a Section 35 order to block the Gender Recognition Reform Bill. This of course is now the catalyst for the torrent of outrage, indignation and anger to pour forth from the First Minister. However, her cloak of deceit has been whipped away to reveal her underhand practices. The last thing she needs is continuing examination of her catastrophic domestic policy failures across the NHS, education, transport and infrastructure and so resulting in an ill-thought-out and simply bad piece of legislation. Utilising the First Minister’s language, it is outrageous that she is prepared to use people’s lives and emotions to further her independence ambitions by intentionally creating this division. Further, it should be noted that 16-year-olds are unable to drink in a pub or go to the cinema to watch a film with an 18 certificate classification yet under her gender legislation, can make a decision that may well affect that individual for the rest of their lives. The First Minister knew exactly what she was doing when she ignored public opinion, ignored some of her own MSPs and ignored relevant amendments to the bill that may well have avoided the UK Government invoking the Section 35 order. It is time for her faux outrage and political manoeuvring to be ignored and treated with the contempt it deserves. Richard Allison, Edinburgh.