DO you hear that? It’s the silence of another UK scandal passing by with barely a whisper from the British press. In the past two weeks, a major human rights institution has found itself marred by accusations of having become another Conservative party tool in the culture war; of having created a poisonous and damaging working environment; and of having overstepped the very boundaries of Scotland’s devolution settlement.
So where’s the ruckus? Surely, at a time when Downing Street is facing multiple, consecutive scandals, it should not be the case that such a transgression would pass by without comment – yet the recent actions of the Equalities and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) have sidestepped any widespread scrutiny, in part I believe because they fit too readily with our own right-wing press’s hostility toward the transgender community.
The EHRC is an organisation that functions at arm’s length to the UK Government – but there is a major flaw in how it is run. While it allegedly maintains a distance from the revolving door of prime ministers, in reality the UK Government maintains a dangerous grip on the watchdog. It may not have a direct say in how the commission runs but it can affect its agenda in a far more significant manner – the government, in the shape of Women’s and Equalities Minister Liz Truss, is responsible for appointing the EHRC’s board members.
Over the past few years, the UK Government has tacked significantly further to the right on issues of human rights, equality, immigration and welfare, and the EHRC has seemingly found itself along for the ride. And now it seems the government’s agenda has seeped into the very pores of the public-sector organisation itself.
Where previously there was support for reforming Scotland’s Gender Recognition Act to be less humiliating for transgender people, now there are diktats from on high to the Scottish Government to rethink plans for reforming the outdated legislation.
Last week, the EHRC said that “further consideration is needed before any change to the law should be made”. A spokesperson for the body said “everyone’s concerns should be discussed and addressed carefully, openly and with respect, to avoid further damage and division”, but insisted more time is needed
Stonewall said the EHRC’s statement was an attack on trans equality and said it is “deeply troubled” by the approach the group is taking to trans people’s human rights.
By their nature, human rights are foundational aspects of our existence. The fact that the EHRC’s commitment to upholding them can seemingly wax and wane in accordance with the political needs of whichever administration is drunkenly shuffling around the Downing Street garden is of serious concern.
Particularly at a time when influential party members like Jacob Rees-Mogg are being criticised for sharing misinformation about reproductive healthcare in the House of Commons. The ruling Conservative Party has shown itself time and again to be an enemy to equalities and human rights, and its influence within the EHRC undermines its very function.
A sudden intervention by the EHRC on Scottish legislation represents another area where the Conservatives are eschewing the spirit of the devolution settlement to press their own agenda forward in opposition to two public consultations which found that the majority in Scotland backed reform.
GRA reform is moving ahead in Scotland, and in passing, will reveal that the myriad inflated concerns associated with it have been ill-founded. If the EHRC truly was relying on evidence when it comes to updating the legislation – as it claimed on Twitter following a backlash to claims about the inner workings of the institution – then it would not be playing a role in fanning the flames of fearful speculation about what maybe might possibly could somehow happen should it pass.
All evidence from the many countries that have already adopted a system of self-declaration have shown there to be no issue whatsoever.
When reform passes in Scotland, a major argument that anti-trans organisations and culture war propagandists have been using to sow doubt will find itself washed away – and in its wake will be a human rights organisation left looking like the Tory front that it has regrettably become.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel