Chamber and committees

Finally, I will go back to the criminal offence of making a false statutory declaration. I do not feel as though I have heard enough about that. In the private session with the individual whom Karen Adam spoke about, who had transitioned and then transitioned again, we heard that that person was not aware of the criminal offence. Would that person have been liable to imprisonment or a fine in that case? I just need clarification of that, if you do not mind, convener.

Good afternoon, Senator Doherty. In your opening statement, what did you mean when you said that there are attempts to repeal the Irish Gender Recognition Act 2015 and that you might have a summer of discontent?

Thanks.

Sorry, Senator Doherty. In your answer to Karen Adam’s question, or in your opening statement, you stated that your bill was a great piece of legislation but it was for a very tiny number of people. Now you are arguing the opposite: that it is a tiny number of people who may be affected in a prison setting, for example. It is not like for like in terms of the argument that you are making.

Okay. I have two more questions.

I noted that, within the Irish Gender Recognition Act 2015, there was a reporting process, which required the Minister for Social Protection

“to prepare a report on the performance of his or her function under the act in the immediately preceding year”.

Unfortunately, I have not had time to look at that report, but is it laid every year? What did it find? Did it find that there were things that you could have done better, which you could recommend for this Parliament to do?

I also want to ask you about prison, so I will do that now. I am sort of looking at the unintended consequences of some of the act.

I wondered about the analysis that you did. We know not to underestimate the number of women who are in prison because they were not able to prove self-defence in domestic abuse. You referred to cases in Ireland of males with gender recognition certificates being sent to prison. Did you do any analysis prior to, or during, the evidence sessions on your bill to work out the impact of housing males with GRCs in female prisons?

I will interrupt you there, since you said that we could.

It is interesting that you said that, because it seems that you regretted the wording in the census. We have been talking about that a lot. How do you think that the different terms that are used in data collection impact on policy development, for example in health and criminal justice?

Yes.

Okay.

In England and Wales, the number of prosecutions has been no greater, proportionately, than it has been in Scotland. What specific changes do you see in the bill that would make prosecutions easier, in terms of the way in which offences and exceptions are defined?

I am quite concerned about this, convener. I have seen hare coursers. They scarpered before anybody got there, which means that nobody had seen them. It was pitch black and they had torches. The problem with hare coursing is that the police cannot catch the offenders because they are fleet of foot. Although people might not necessarily walk their dogs at night in the middle of nowhere, the bill would still need to be clear about protecting ordinary dog walkers.

Before I ask about licensing, I would like to get some clarity—in writing, if necessary—from the Crown Office and Police Scotland regarding the concern about use of the term “reasonable steps” in section 3(3)(c). Lord Bonomy said that the courts would have no trouble with that expression. Why are the courts unable to manage that expression, which is widely found in statute?

I will move on to licensing. Detective Sergeant Telford, Lord Bonomy noted that, with or without licensing,

“The same difficulties of proof and enforcement would remain.”

With regard to enforcement and proof, what is your view of the licensing provisions that are set out in the bill?