UK government’s veto of Scotland’s gender reform bill ruled lawful by Scottish court
Scotland’s highest civil court has ruled that the UK government acted lawfully in blocking Holyrood’s controversial gender reform bill.
Legislation making it easier for people to change their legally-recognised sex was passed by MSPs last December.
It then became a constitutional dispute in January when the UK government took the unprecedented step of using a Section 35 order to stop the bill from receiving royal assent and becoming law.
Scottish Secretary Alister Jack had argued the bill clashed with UK-wide equality laws and differing systems of gender recognition north and south of the border would create “significant complications”.
The Scottish government launched a legal challenge and a three-day hearing took place at the Court of Session in Edinburgh in September.
On Friday, Lady Haldane delivered her judgment, saying the UK government’s decision to block the gender reform bill from gaining royal assent was lawful.
The Scottish government has the right to appeal the case further through the Scottish courts, and ultimately to the Supreme Court in London.
Mr Jack welcomed the decision and said Scottish ministers “need to stop wasting taxpayers’ money” and instead focus on other issues that matter to people in Scotland, “such as growing the economy and cutting [NHS] waiting lists”.
First Minister Humza Yousaf said it was a “dark day for devolution”.
Posting on X, formerly Twitter, he said: “Today’s judgment confirms beyond doubt that devolution is fundamentally flawed.
“The court has confirmed that legislation passed by a majority in Holyrood can be struck down by Westminster. The only way to guarantee we get true self-government is through independence.
“This is a dark day for devolution. Sovereignty should lie with the people of Scotland, not a Westminster government we didn’t vote for with the ability to overrule our laws.
“We, of course, respect the court’s judgment and will take time to consider its findings.”
Meghan Gallacher, deputy leader of the Scottish Conservatives, said: “This is a humiliating defeat for Humza Yousaf and the SNP, who have once again squandered taxpayers’ cash on a self-serving but doomed court case.
“Their reckless Gender Recognition Reform Bill is deeply unpopular with the Scottish public because its self-ID principle compromises the safety of women and girls – as the case of a double-rapist being sent to a female prison demonstrated.”
A demonstration for trans rights outside the UK government office in Edinburgh earlier this year
Read more:
Why is the bill controversial?
The Scottish Greens said it was a “devastating day for equality and democracy”.
Maggie Chapman, the party’s equality spokesperson, said: “It is a democratic outrage, crushing basic rights and equality for some of Scotland’s most marginalised people.”
She added: “It is horrible, it is heartbreaking and it is unjust.
“It makes a mockery of any vote or decision that we as parliamentarians take at Holyrood from now on, if the result is knowing that Westminster will veto anything they don’t like.
“Self-ID is normal and is used in countries around the world. What our parliament voted for was a small change that would have made a big difference to a vulnerable community. I hope the Scottish government will consider all options for appeal.”
A demonstration for trans rights outside the UK government office in Edinburgh in January
The reform bill
The Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill was passed by MSPs just before Christmas last year.
It aims to simplify the process for trans people to change gender in the eyes of the law.
No diagnosis or medical reports would be required, and the period in which adult applicants need to have lived in their acquired gender would be cut to three months.
Teenagers aged 16 and 17 applying for a gender recognition certificate would have to live in their acquired gender for at least six months.
Critics have argued the proposals undermine women’s rights and single-sex spaces.
Demonstrators at a Let Women Speak rally in Glasgow’s George Square in February
Colin Macfarlane, director of nations at LGBTQ+ charity Stonewall, said the organisation was “disappointed” with the ruling.
He added: “This unfortunately means more uncertainty for trans people in Scotland, who will now be waiting once again, to see whether they will be able to have their gender legally recognised through a process that is in line with leading nations like Ireland, Canada and New Zealand.
“Whatever happens next in discussions with the UK and Scottish governments on this matter, Stonewall will continue to press all administrations to make progress on LGBTQ+ rights in line with leading international practice.”
Premier League match tickets at Chelsea have been selling for more than twice the price of a season ticket on an American exchange website with a familiar director and investor to supporters – club chairman Todd Boehly.
Amid growing fan fury, Sky News was able to access the Vivid Seats platform on different devices last week from London – and saw tickets for the visit of Liverpool on 4 May, priced by Chelsea at a maximum of £80, being sold for between £537 and £2,666.
Some tickets were listed as being sold by traders.
Chairman of Chelsea Todd Boehly. Pic: Reuters
Chelsea’s official website appeared to show no availability for this premium fixture, with the Blues battling for Champions League qualification and Liverpool potentially celebrating being crowned Premier League winners.
The most expensive Stamford Bridge season ticket for this campaign was £1,015.
Vivid is listed by the Premier League among “unauthorised ticket websites” with a message: “We would urge fans to exercise extreme caution when dealing with these websites.”
Vivid insisted it adheres to laws and regulations in Britain
The Chelsea Supporters’ Trust has written to the Premier League to ask that Vivid – given its ties with a club’s shareholder – “ceases facilitating the sale of tickets for significantly above face value”.
Mr Boehly – part of the consortium that replaced Roman Abramovich as owner in 2022 – has not addressed accusations of a “conflict of interest” or claims he is undermining efforts to combat ticket touting.
There are anti-touting warnings on signs in the streets approaching the stadium.
Sky News found some tickets for more than £2,000 on Vivid Seats
An official Chelsea Ticket Exchange allows season ticket holders to sell their tickets “at the pro-rata price of season tickets” to a club member “in a safe, secure environment”.
While Chelsea’s website says to only buy tickets in the UK from official sellers, it adds: “Many of the websites that advertise and sell tickets online are not within the jurisdiction of UK law.
“This means, while we report these sites when we see Chelsea tickets on them, there is little we can do to shut down the sites.”
Sign at Stamford Bridge warning against ticket touting
On Vivid, we did see warnings telling visiting users not to buy seats in the home sections and a pop-up eventually appeared after browsing the availability, saying: “Tickets for the EPL matches are not currently available for purchase in your location.”
No attempt was made by us to buy tickets. But should we have been able to see the listings at all?
Sky News first asked for comment from Vivid last Monday and continued to see ticket listings with variable prices in pounds during the week. It took until Friday night for any form of response.
“Vivid Seats respectfully adheres to the laws that are in place in the United Kingdom and is not in violation of any regulations around EPL tickets,” the email read in part. “As such, Vivid Seats’ policy restricts the sale and marketing of EPL tickets in the United Kingdom.”
Pic: Reuters
When Sky News checked the website again on Saturday the listings for Premier League matches were no longer visible as they are from outside of Britain.
Asked if they were no longer visible after our inquiries, Vivid’s official replied: “The conclusions that you are drawing are factually incorrect.
“We understand that people will try to find ways to circumvent technology and as such, we have validation protocols in place in order to restrict the sale and marketing of EPL tickets in the United Kingdom.”
Again, Vivid insisted it adheres to laws and regulations in Britain.
But the same official did not respond to an email detailing how we were able to view the tickets listings from London on separate days, without using VPN software that can make your browser seem as if it’s accessing the internet from another country.
Chelsea’s match against Ipswich at Stamford Bridge. Pic: Reuters
‘It’s the only way I was going to get here’
Ticket exchange websites can be the only way for some fans overseas to come to matches.
When Ipswich played at Stamford Bridge on 13 April, Baz Gillespie was able to watch after 20 years living in Cyprus by paying a vastly-inflated £300 for two tickets on a website other than Vivid.
“The only way I was going to get here was that way,” he said, remembering the days he could just queue up and pay a fiver for a ticket.
The same match was Martin van Dijk’s first-ever game at the Bridge, having come from the Netherlands after paying €150 (£128) on another exchange website after initially trying through Vivid.
“If there’s no other option, and you want to visit, it’s the only way, but I’d rather get it through like the normal way,” he said.
Chelsea fan Martin van Dijk paid €150 for a ticket on a resale website
‘An absolute disgrace’
It is the “normal way” that so many supporters want to protect and are aghast at Mr Boehly’s links to Vivid, predating his purchase of a stake in Chelsea.
“It’s an absolute disgrace,” supporter Ben Grey said. “He shouldn’t be involved in Chelsea and a reselling website. It’s unethical from a basic perspective.
“The club are coming out with communication saying that they’re against ticket reselling and our semi-majority shareholder [has a website] reselling tickets to our games.”
Asked what the Premier League should do, he replied: “I’m a massive Chelsea fan, I don’t want Chelsea to be hit hard by anything.
“But the fact of the matter is they need to sort that out and if they’re allowing there to be an owner of a club who’s reselling tickets, it’s a disgrace.”
Fan Ben Grey said Mr Boehy shouldn’t be involved in Chelsea and a reselling website
‘Not a very good look’
Another fan, Rich Still, called it “21st century greed”.
The issue is resonating with young children.
Rhys Edwards, watching with his father, said: “It doesn’t look too good on Chelsea and their owners to be fair.
“Saying that [the website] is not authorised by the league they’re playing in isn’t a very good look.”
Officials with Chelsea, the Premier League and Mr Boehly declined to comment.
The Vivid statement to Sky News stressed: “It is important to note that Vivid Seats does not set the base price for tickets sold on its marketplace or receive any revenue from that base price; only the seller sets and receives the base ticket price.”
Labour MP Rupa Huq has proposed a law change to improve pricing transparency
‘It’s like the Wild West’
Vivid highlighted to Sky News its “long-standing partnership”, including being a backer of a 2023 summer tour of the United States.
Chelsea’s website featured a quote saying: “We are pleased to join with a company committed to becoming the ultimate partner for connecting fans to the live events, teams and artists they love.”
The government has launched a consultation to prevent people from being ripped off in Britain by the resale of tickets.
Read more:
Chelsea star’s £160,000 car seized
UK set to host 2035 Women’s World Cup
The limit could range from the cost of the original ticket to a 30% uplift to stop the public being “fleeced” by professional touts.
Labour MP for Ealing Central and Acton, Rupa Huq, has separately proposed a change to the law to improve pricing transparency on secondary ticketing sites.
“It’s an unregulated market,” she told Sky News. “It’s like the Wild West. It needs getting back into control.”
A murder investigation is under way after a woman was stabbed to death in north London.
Police were called to an address in Ayley Croft, Enfield, around 7pm on Saturday following reports of a stabbing.
Emergency workers treated a 45-year-old woman but she died at the scene, the Metropolitan Police said.
The victim’s next of kin has been informed and is being supported by specialist officers.
Officers at the scene in Enfield
No one has been arrested in connection with her death.
Police have been seen focusing on Gainsborough House, a high-rise block on the estate.
An officer was spotted at the window on the fifth floor. Patrols have also been seen outside.
An officer in Gainsborough House
Detective Chief Inspector Neil John said: “Our thoughts are with the victim’s family at this difficult time.
“As our investigation continues, there will be an increased police presence in the area, and a crime scene remains in place.
“We understand this will be very distressing to the local community and anyone who has concerns can speak to local officers.”
Read more from Sky News:
Husband describes ‘horror’ as wife fatally hit by van
Prince Andrew joins King and Queen at Easter service
Police are appealing for dashcam footage from anyone who was driving through Ayley Croft between 6.30pm and 7.30pm on Saturday.
-
Sports2 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports1 year agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike
-
Business3 years agoBank of England’s extraordinary response to government policy is almost unthinkable | Ed Conway