Ball remains in Scottish Government’s court on gender recognition reforms – Jack
The Scottish Secretary said he ‘simply did not agree’ with SNP minister Shona Robison on the use of Section 35.
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Alister Jack has said the ball remains in the Scottish Government’s court in the dispute over gender recognition legislation, saying he simply disagrees with its arguments.
The Scottish Secretary said it is up to ministers in Edinburgh how they wish to proceed with the Gender Recognition Reform Bill, which he blocked from becoming law by using Section 35 of the Scotland Act.
Mr Jack had a phone call with Scottish Government minister Shona Robison at the end of January, with minutes from the call published on Thursday.
The minutes say he acknowledged a memorandum of understanding around the use of Section 35 had not been followed.
Speaking as he visited the Halo Trust’s offices in Dumfriesshire, Mr Jack said he disagreed with this.
He told the PA news agency: “They (the Scottish Government) may have released the readout of the minutes of the meeting, we haven’t released ours.
“But I have asked my office to write back and explain to them the bits we disagree on.
“I heard what she (Shona Robison) said, whatever point she was making, but I just simply did not agree with it.”
Mr Jack said “the ball’s entirely in their court” on how the Scottish Government wishes to proceed with the Bill.
He said: “They can either drop it or they can amend it, or they can if they want to take us to court.
“What I do know is that the Bill has adverse impacts on UK-wide legislation, and it’s for that reason that I looked at the legal advice and used section 35.”
The Scottish Secretary said it is not his role to suggest what amendments could be made to the Bill, but he and law officers would consider any amendments the Scottish Government wishes to make.
Also during his visit, Mr Jack was asked about deputy Conservative party chairman Lee Anderson’s support for reintroducing the death penalty.
He said: “We’re not having the death penalty in this country – no political party in decades has been suggesting the death penalty.”
Asked about Mr Anderson’s role in the party, Mr Jack continued: “I’m sure he’ll be an excellent deputy chairman, because he’s got bags of enthusiasm and he’ll get around the associations, make an impact, get the message out there.
“But he is not a member of the Government, he’s deputy chairman of the party and he’s allowed to have his own opinions.”