IT seems that the UK Supreme Court consistently rules against the Scottish Government.
Today the UK Supreme Court rejected the Scottish Government’s legal arguments that the category of “woman” includes both biological females and trans women who hold a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC). The Supreme Court has ruled that a GRC does not change a person's legal sex for the purposes of the Equality Act.
It is remarkable that so much time and attention is devoted to such a tiny minority, the supposed threat of which is exaggerated out of all proportion to their numbers and used as a weapon in the right-wing culture wars. Many of those who are most vocal in their opposition to trans rights are cynically using the issue as a Trojan horse in their efforts to undermine the rights of women and minorities in general. The Trump administration is a case in point.
Only 8464 people in the UK hold a GRC, approximately half of whom are trans men. The 2021 census of England and Wales found that there were roughly equal numbers of trans men and trans women. Today's ruling means that trans men, whose existence is usually overlooked in the fervid and often toxic debate around trans issues, are legally defined as women for the purposes of the Equality Act.
Although this case was taken by the group For Women Scotland against the Scottish Government, today's ruling applies across the whole UK.
Gender critical activists like to present this issue as a matter of common sense, but in the real world things are not so simple. Although today's ruling centred on the definition of the word woman, it also logically applies to the definition of the word man. Today's ruling means that an individual who is pumped full of testosterone, who has a beard, is balding, who presents as male, and may have a functioning penis as well as being sexually attracted to women, is now legally permitted in women's only spaces, whereas an individual who is taking the same drugs used for chemical castration, who presents as female and is sexually attracted to men, is not.
Today's ruling merely throws up a lot of other questions. This issue is far from settled.
First Minister John Swinney said that the Scottish Government accepts the ruling, saying: “The Scottish Government accepts today’s Supreme Court judgement. The ruling gives clarity between two relevant pieces of legislation passed at Westminster.
“We will now engage on the implications of the ruling. Protecting the rights of all will underpin our actions.”
By-election date announced
It has been announced that a by-election will be held on 5 June in the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse Holyrood constituency which had been held by the late SNP MSP Christina McKelvie, who lost her battle against breast cancer last month. Scottish Parliament Presiding Officer Alison Johnstone announced the date of the by election in a letter to the chief executive of South Lanarkshire Council, the local authority in which the seat is located.
South Lanarkshire councillor Katy Loudon has been announced as the SNP candidate. She had been the SNP candidate in the Rutherglen and Hamilton West Westminster by election in October 2023, which was won by Labour's Michael Shanks, a man who has since proven himself to be amongst Keir Starmer's most obsequious loyalists.
Widely seen as a two horse race between Labour and the SNP, until a few months ago Labour could have been expected to win the seat comfortably, but given the collapse in support for Labour in recent opinion polling, the SNP are the favourites to retain the seat albeit with a likely reduced majority.
The SNP candidate Katy Loudon said: "This campaign is about giving the people of Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse the chance to vote for an SNP MSP who will build on Christina's incredible legacy and stand up for local people at every opportunity."
Meanwhile, Scottish Labour’s Jackie Baillie said: "This by-election is a chance for the people of Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse to vote for a new direction with Scottish Labour."
Labour has dropped its discredited "change" slogan and instead is going with the risible "new direction", that direction being cuts to disability benefits, reneging on promises to Grangemouth workers and Waspi women, sucking up to Donald Trump and presiding over a new austerity which Labour insists is not austerity at all, just like Labour wraps itself in British flags, backs the Tories' hard Brexit, demonises migrants and insists it's not a nationalist party. Labour is fooling no one. Jackie Baillie and Anas Sarwar won't fool the electors of Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse either.
Labour refuse to back calls for Grangemouth nationalisation
The Labour Party has dismissed out of hand a call from the SNP to bring the Grangemouth plant into public ownership. SNP MSP Michelle Thomson, whose Falkirk East constituency includes the Grangemouth site, has urged Sarwar to come good on pledges he made before the General Election that Labour would “step in to save the jobs at the refinery”.
She said that Labour’s actions south of the Border to save the privately owned Scunthorpe steel mill had raised questions about Sarwar’s repeated assertions that there was nothing to be done about Grangemouth because it was run by a “privately owned company”.
She said: “Far from both Grangemouth and British Steel being incomparable as your London bosses try to argue, they are a perfect comparison and must therefore be given parity of treatment.
“The Chinese company, Jingye, in Scunthorpe is reporting losses of around £700,000 whereas PetroChina, at Grangemouth, reports losses of around £500,000.
“Your Labour Government plans to capitalise Scunthorpe for up to £5 billion – 25 times the amount being set aside for Grangemouth with the paltry £200 million [pledged by Keir Starmer but now in doubt] being loans or equity for projects that meet National Wealth Fund criteria.”
Labour's Holyrood economy spokesperson Daniel Johnson MSP made clear the party would not support nationalisation. Johnson used the nationalisation call to attack the SNP and attempt shift blame for the plant's closure onto the Scottish Government.
And on Monday, Swinney said the Scottish Government did not have "adequate" resources to nationalise the refinery itself.
