''martinhutch
Full Member
I’m staggered the BBC doesn’t appear to be covering the Zahawi tax story (I can’t find it if they are). If so , the process of being comprehensively neutered by their political appointees has been completed.''
not just the bbc - not immediately apparent on the guardian site either?!
thats not quite what I said.
In essence that is exactly what you said. You are claiming that any concerns expressed by Starmer and Guardian editorials is purely motivated by opposition to the SNP/Scottish independence, you don't seem to believe that they could be genuine concerns.
Here are your exact words:
Sunak and Starmer have the same objectives with regards to Scotland. they want the SNP to fail and they do not want a left wing socially liberal exemplar north of the border. The Guardian is also staunchly unionist and opposes the SNP at all times.
In essence that is exactly what you said
Errm - which is it then. Exactly or in essence :-0 Ulike you to use sloppy language
I do not believe he has genuine concerns given that the GRA changes nothing with regards to what happens once you have a certificate and that under scots law you are an adult with regards to medical treatment at 16
So concerns over safe spaces etc are unaffected by the GRA and his opposition to having control over your medical treatment at 16 simpply shows he does not understand scots law
so he may believe he has genuine concerns but in actual fact his concerns are based on a fundamental misunderstanding or he is making this statement for politicalpurposes
Errm – which is it then. Exactly or in essence :-0
Well if we are engaging in the precise art of hair splitting.... both.
The first bit was me using my words to discribe what you said, and the second bit was your actual comment in your own words.
I hope that clears up any confusion 🧐
🙂
The key point is why is he getting involved in this and why does he think he has the right to go against the scottish branch who supported this act? the vast majority of Labour MSPs support it including the leader of the scots branch.
He is also going against scots law where you have the right to make decisions about your healthcare at 16.
not just the bbc – not immediately apparent on the guardian site either?!
Or C4 apparently. I tried to start a Post about this but it never went up on the site. I thought 'My God, the bastards have nobbled STW too!'
not just the bbc – not immediately apparent on the guardian site either?!
I did find it on the Guardian by Googling "Zahawi tax" and it popped up - they seemed to be quoting the Sun as breaking the story
Though to be fair, we are all so busy frothing about the Scottish Gender Act it's easily missed in the news, don't you think?
not just the bbc – not immediately apparent on the guardian site either?!
Guardian reported on it a couple of days back. Given it was the observer who started the story they might be holding some stuff back to the weekend.
The GRA stuff seems tohave ended up split over a number of thread. I have read the tories reasoning for blocking the bill. Its really really thin. some of it is outright lies but it boils down to " how very dare you have different laws" " it must remain very difficult to get a certificate" " but what about the children" NO wonder they did not want to go to court
Surely, the bill could be read and submissions about its application to UK wide law (if real) given BEFORE it was passed? Why now?
And this bit...
the removal of the requirement for an applicant to provide any evidence that they have lived in their acquired gender when submitting an application
...doesn't the bill make it an offence for someone to declare that have lived in their "acquired gender" for the required period when they haven't? That's better than insisting on everyone applying giving evidence (which could be faked anyway). No? A "fake" application is then a criminal offence. Some reassurance for those worried about people who aren't trans applying in bad faith.
we are all so busy frothing about the Scottish Gender Act
Dead Cat
Zahawi case finally appears on BBC, but its not on the front page
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64304132
There is no doubt in my mind this is a political move by the tories as they could have taken a number of other less controversial routes on this. Why have they not done this with other issues that cause similar divergence between Scotland and England?
I am sure the political calculation is that by doing this they think they will bolster their support in Scotland as its the only time I can think of when SNP labour and Lib dems are all on one side and tories on the other. so its useful for the tories to be able to blame labour and libdem as well as the SNP. Its an attempt to put clear blue water between them and the rest of scotlands political parties so as well as fighting for the unionist vote which is moving to labour they hope to pick up the anti equal rights vote
it will also play well in their core constituency in England
we are all so busy frothing about the Scottish Gender Act
I have no real ideological position on the GRA or trans rights in general, as I suspect do most other people, so I'm genuinely confused why such a tiny fringe issue gets the airtime it does. 🤷♂️
The green party made it a condition of going into coalition with the SNP that the GRA went thru. Its a very divisive issue and Sturgeon expended a lot of political capital to get it thru and its been highly modified from its original form to find a balance between conflicting rights
This will effect a couple of hundred people a year. As you say its hardly worth frothing about especially as IMO the GRA has got the balance about right
One of the tories objections is so far fetched its ludicrous From the grauniad:
Where a claimant may deem a colleague to be the most appropriate comparator of the opposite sex, but that colleague then receives a GRC, the 2010 Act would not enable them to be cited as the comparator in the claim. This could prevent the comparator test from accurately identifying what might otherwise have been deemed unlawful.
As the criteria for being issued with a GRC under the 2004 Act presently mean GRCs can only be issued to a small group who have lived in their acquired gender for at least 2 years, the effect of this on equal pay provisions is significantly limited.
However, the bill will allow a new and significantly broader category of people to change their legal sex. As more individuals are eligible to change their legal sex, the adverse effect on the operation of the 2010 Act’s equal pay provisions grows. In particular, an individual’s ability to gain a full GRC after living in their acquired gender for 6 or 9 months would increase the likelihood of equal pay claims involving individuals who had started and completed the gender recognition process only relatively recently or who obtained a GRC while a claim was ongoing.
Many of us would conclude that the chances of this happening – in equal pay cases where no other “comparators” are available – seem very, very remote. And the chances of this producing a genuine equal pay injustice seem non-existent.
In its own document the government admits these issues “may arise infrequently”. But it claims in some instances these issues could be “significant”.
I’m genuinely confused why such a tiny fringe issue gets the airtime it does
It's interesting watching people go down the rabbit hole... I follow Rosie Duffield (Labour MP), and used to follow Graham Linehan and many others that have become overly focused on Trans people... it seems to start with the fears of some women that accepting Trans Women as women somehow reduces what it is to be a woman (the view that trans people are just mocking them or playing games is common) and turns into a focus on rare criminal behaviour where the perpetrator is a Trans Woman, or a man pretending to be a Trans woman. Then it gets very angry and offensive quite fast. There can be a lot of angry offensive behaviour reciprocated as well, by the people painted as sexual deviants and potential criminals simply for being Trans... because, they, er, get angry about how they are portrayed and the attempts to deny them rights in the name of protecting people from the "dangers" of the minority they are part of. Add in the fact that many people know they are Trans in their teens, or even earlier... and that some people want to "protect them" from living the lives they feel they need to live (rather then helping them live it safely and without fear, persecution and poor mental health)... it can all get very frought.
Anyway, all the anger and intensity of opinion is very "clickable"... so lots of attention and "airtime".
Politically it can also be a useful dividing issue for the right to use against people to the "left" of them.
I have no real ideological position on the GRA or trans rights in general, as I suspect do most other people, so I’m genuinely confused why such a tiny fringe issue gets the airtime it does.
That's possibly because you don't feel that it might affect you in any way Daz. I believe that the strongest opposition might be from women's rights organisations.
I suspect that your average "frothing" Daily Mail reader couldn't give a monkeys. Why would they? It is unlikely to affect them - they have much better things to get angry about.
Lil Rishi's class war...
Picking fights with the "enemy within" trouble is the majority of folks are now the enemy within.
That’s possibly because you don’t feel that it might affect you in any way Daz.
Doesn't affect me directly but I'm pretty close to the issue as two of my daughter's best friends have transitioned and one of my mates has a daughter who has transitioned. In my experience the vast majority of people simply respect the decision made by the person and move on with little or no drama, which TBH I find quite amazing. It's really not a subject where ideology has any place IMO.
Womens organisations are split. Trans rights are a situation where different groups rights come into conflict. The GRA and the equalities act between them do their best to find a compromise. The waiting period of 3 or 6 months depending on age under the GRA removes the chance of frivolous or malicious attempts to gain a certificate hugely. I would not be happy with instant self certification for this reason.
One aspect of this tho is the GRA does not change anything in this area of potential conflict because what happens when you get your gender recognition certificate does not change.
The daily mail / express readership do love to froth about this BTW. its where much of the opposition comes from and why Sunak is doing this IMO. there has been a series of articles in those rags decrying the GRA
I suspect that your average “frothing” Daily Mail reader couldn’t give a monkeys.
That's the magic of culture wars, if you convince people that their values/culture etc are under threat they'll get angry and end up voting against their own interests (I know you dont like having the B word mentioned, but its the perfect example)
In terms of culture wars, it's one of many where your age is a good predictor of your response. Guess how that maps onto people likely or unlikely to turn out to vote for the Conservatives... and not just in Scotland... Sunak knows what he's doing. It'll divide Labour in Westminster as well... something the government really need to happen as much as possible between now and the election.
For example -
<h1>Blocking gender law is vital to safeguard women-only spaces, says STEPHEN POLLARD</h1>
google for it and you will find loads of examples. Im not dipping any more into that cesspit of bigotry
The GRA stuff seems tohave ended up split over a number of thread. I have read the tories reasoning for blocking the bill. Its really really thin. some of it is outright lies but it boils down to ” how very dare you have different laws” ” it must remain very difficult to get a certificate” ” but what about the children” NO wonder they did not want to go to court
Good link, @tjagain. I’m not sure it’s thin, however.
The basic argument seems to be that this act affects the equality act because:
a) the Scottish government just won a judicial review saying that a gender recognition certificate changes a person’s sex for the purposes of the equality act.
b) allowing more groups of people to apply for gender recognition certificates will therefore affect how the equality act operates.
It’ll go to court no matter what.
You’d think that a former chancellor and the current chairman of the Tory party (and still a cabinet minister), being done for millions of pounds of tax dodging would be front page news, wouldn’t you? Yet, the BBC haven’t seen fit to even mention it
And not appearing to be getting any fine either.
Wonder if that was related in any way as to why he was so desperate to be Chancellor for a couple of weeks just before Boris imploded?
It doesn't allow more groups of people. it removes barrriers for folk wanting to transition. there is no one extra covered under the GRA than there is for existing legislation
That judicial review also covers folk who have transitioned under existing legislation
the GRA changes nothing in relation to the equalities legislation
two of my daughter’s best friends have transitioned and one of my mates has a daughter who has transitioned.
One of my very best friends grandson is too, I find it really interesting, I see them all the time, might possibly this evening.
A couple of years ago when he was 15 he was wearing a lot of makeup but dressing in a unisex manner. Then last year he went full makeup, jewelry, short skirts, even falsies on occasions. I asked if he was into girls or boys and was told "he's only sixteen FFS, he hasn't got to that stage yet".
A month or two ago he changed his name to a girls name, obviously I need to remember his new name now after years of calling him by another one. I asked if he had done it through deed poll I told of course not, he's doing things slowly, he's only just decided to change it.
Last week I asked whether I should refer to him as "her" and I was told whatever I wanted as he was happy with both. When I said well surely he needs to decide I was told "he's only 17, he doesn't know what he wants yet, there's no rush".
He's a really lovely kid who is much loved by everyone around him, his family and the loads of very good friends that he has. I personally can't see how he is advantaged by existing laws, in less than a year he will be able to take whatever legal decisions he wants. The only problem that I am aware he actually experiences is bullying from other children of his age, certainly not adults. The art college he attends has officially gone on record saying he has their full support.
I am not sure that he is advantaged under current UK legislation but I fully accept that there might be stuff that I am unaware of.
"Just let the old man call you what he wants, it's far too late to change them"
[ I jest... plenty of kids take exactly this loose approach... hard to tell how much that is down to not wanting to make things awkward for other people rather than not really having a preference... of course people who don't want or mind either ended up excluded from the Scottish bill, as a compromise, originally they were to be included... ]
I am not sure that he is advantaged under current UK legislation but I fully accept that there might be stuff that I am unaware of.
You mean disadvantaged? In practical terms, very little. But the law does help frame society. Legal recognition can help someone feel accepted.
The reform allows people without gender dysphora to apply, and also under 18s. That’s definitely more people and different groups of people than before.
If that's aimed at me Kelvin you have no idea how wrong you are. I respect every decision he has made and he has my full support whatever he decides. I get on extremely well with him. He occasionally gives me one of those girlie hugs the girls give each other 🙂
Edit: Oh I see that you have edited to show that it is. Yeah you know my relationship with someone that you don't even know 🙄
No it doesn't. It allows people to transition without a medical diagnosis of gender dysphoria. a subtle but significant point. No one transitions without gender dysphoria
Under 18s are not a separate group. they are younger members of the same group and as above it must be 16 under Scots law. making it 18 would be subject to legal review and would lose IMO as Scots law is quite clear on this
the group of people is " those wanting to transition"
And not appearing to be getting any fine either.
The penalty for tax avoidance is having to pay the tax you avoided (probably rather less after some ‘negotiation’). Its bollocks.
Ernie
You might be interested in this: Murray is now refusing to say if he supports the veto instead choosing an attack line of - "its the SNP and Tories at fault for being argumentative" conveniently ignoring the fact that the MSPs support this with a couple of exceptions. Asked outright if he supports the veto he refused to say either way
Its pretty clear we have a big split in attitudes between the MSPs and the MPs and they are trying out attack lines to see what fits best. Starmer has shut up from what I can see
Ive linked to the full statement above. It looks a really thin case which is why i assume they did not go to court but instead made this order. Labour party in Westminster are now saying the case is thin
Some of it is obvious nonsense. ie the stuff about equal pay and the stuff about having different regimes north and south of the border and also the risks to single sex services and schools
Who was the Tory MP on Channel4 news saying one of her aims was to not have a different legal situation in Scotland and England. 🤦🏻♂️
Labour took the position of not taking a position in the Westminster vote. Unsurprising, but cowardly.
This has made it even clearer that the view from Westminster is " Scotland know your place"
i expect this to produce a further boost for independence despite the GRA not being very popular - because it lays bare how Scotland is treated.
Sorry, Tory MSP… Rachael Hamilton…
Anyway, where’s Sunk? Good cover for lying low all this. Presumably he’ll be popping back up to take credit for any fall in inflation…
Sorry, Tory MSP… Rachael Hamilton
Another fine upstanding Tory....
I asked if he was into girls or boys and was told “he’s only sixteen FFS, he hasn’t got to that stage yet”.
I've asked that question to my oldest (cis) daughter who describes herself as queer. Admittedly she's a little older at 18 but even at 16 she was telling me in some detail that sexuality and gender are not things that they particularly obsess about, and it's all very fluid. They be who they want to be, and they have relationships with people who they're attracted to, irrespective of gender or sexuality. It's really quite radical, and difficult for us old fogies to get our heads around. I'll admit I have some issues with it, but that's a result of my upbringing and ingrained biases, so I try very hard to take a lead from my kids and their peers because they're way ahead on this stuff than people of our generation.
The Labour party is pointless.
It's lib dem or get in the sea... or Tory if that's what you want.
Vote lib dem get tory.
It’s lib dem or get in the sea…
Funniest thing I've seen written on here in ages. 😂
