Thread by @WG_Scotland

We contacted the govt today regarding its position that potentially 'offensive' responses to the GRA consultation will neither be considered nor published. Before going into what we asked, we have confirmed with the Info Commissioner that we can FOI those responses, & we will.>

>We asked that the govt considers & publishes responses it finds potentially offensive, unless there are legal reasons to withhold those responses (for example if they include any of the other criteria from Chapter 1 in relation to issues like copyright etc that mean they can't >

>be published). We highlighted how the govt has failed to define its terms, or what it considers offensive in relation to the groups it mentions, & it cannot assume people will understand these terms & what the govt will find potentially offensive, & we also highlighted how this>

>requirement can potentially be discriminatory.

However if the govt persists in this position, we asked the govt to urgently update the consultation to clarify what it means by terms like 'transphobia', particularly as the implication of the Stonewall definition is that >

>feminism itself is transphobic. The govt has already confirmed it will send us more information on what this section is referring to & its definitions, & we will share this once received, however such information should be provided in the consultation, so the public have the >

>information they need to ensure their response is not discarded.

We also asked the govt for the criteria that will be used when the responses are reviewed for the govt, in terms of determining which responses are potentially offensive & should not be included. >

>Lastly, we asked if this requirement was consistent with the govt's other consultations.

We will provide updates on all of this as we receive them, & when the time comes we will FOI the responses discarded by the govt on the basis of potential offence.