We have received a troubling clarification from the Scottish Govt re consultation responses it will not publish. The govt is now saying it will not publish responses which mention anyone convicted of a crime by name, or any person's known trans status. We will challenge this.>
>We can still FOI those responses for the purposes of our group's analysis, & the govt has confirmed it *will include all responses in its own analysis*, however this essentially functions as a decision not to make public responses which present the govt with crucial counter >
>evidence re its claims, for example even mentioning Karen White would mean your response won't be published. The govt did not mention in Chapter 1.11 of its consultation paper that it would consider such references as a data protection issue. Even worse, the govt says it won't >
>publish responses where a trans person 'is identifiable by deduction' from the text, so there's no way around it either. This is entirely unacceptable & unnecessary: Naming those who have been *convicted* of crimes &/or referring to the *publicly known* trans status of an >
>individual like Karen White does not breach data protection, & we will challenge this with the govt & raise it with the Info Commissioner. We anticipate this will lead to large numbers of responses not being published, but again, pls still robustly respond to the consultation >
>all responses will be included in the govt's analysis & we will FOI responses the govt doesn't publish if we fail to convince the govt to publish them, & the govt has to publish all FOI responses on its website.
The govt also confirmed the following to us:
The govt will >
The govt also confirmed the following to us:
The govt will >
>review responses itself to decide which should not be published, but, again, *it will include all responses in its analysis*.
Re offensive language, the govt says much will depend on the context, but the criteria they will be using is that responses which include 'a swear >
Re offensive language, the govt says much will depend on the context, but the criteria they will be using is that responses which include 'a swear >
>word', 'advocates violent action against a group in society' &/or 'constitutes a threat against another person or group', will not be published.
The govt will also not publish responses which refer to a named transwoman as being male or male bodied, but will publish responses>
The govt will also not publish responses which refer to a named transwoman as being male or male bodied, but will publish responses>
>which refer to transwomen as a class as being male, or male bodied.
The govt confirmed that responses which refer to women as females, rather than as a gender identity, will be published. >
The govt confirmed that responses which refer to women as females, rather than as a gender identity, will be published. >
>Pls *do not let this prevent you from putting in a response which refers to individuals such as Karen White in order to counter the govt's claims* or let it weaken your response at all. Pls just ensure to publish your response, which you can do anonymously, & we can then FOI it.
