Third report- Reform of the Gender Recognition Act

The government rejected the claim that the £5 fee reduction was 'tokenistic', explaining that it allowed for quick implementation via secondary legislation, unlike full removal which would require primary legislation. They noted a significant increase in GRC applications since the fee reduction, demonstrating its positive impact.

The government accepted the recommendation, confirming the digitised GRC application process is in its testing phase and will be operational by summer 2022. It assured the system's accessibility on smartphones and mobiles, and committed to retaining a paper-based application process for those who prefer it.

The government detailed that NHSEI is committed to commissioning a new service model, is evaluating existing pilot clinics by an independent third party, and will use these findings to develop a new service specification to ensure reduced waiting times are maintained.

The government acknowledged the importance of engaging with the committee but did not address the specific criticism regarding the unacceptable delay in responding to its consultation or the failure to communicate progress during the delay. It highlighted that a response was eventually published and Ministers provided opportunities for scrutiny.

The government explicitly rejected the recommendation for an action plan to reform the Gender Recognition Act, stating its September 2020 position on spousal consent, living in acquired gender, and diagnosis requirements remains correct and provides robust checks and balances. They clarified that the consultation was not a referendum and ministerial decisions stand.

The government's response did not address the committee's deep disappointment regarding the GEO and EHRC's perceived evasion of parliamentary scrutiny and failure to engage with the inquiry. Instead, it focused on rejecting the claim that the GRC fee reduction was 'tokenistic' and explained its rationale.

The government's response defended the £5 fee reduction, arguing it was not 'tokenistic' and was implemented quickly via secondary legislation, leading to a significant increase in GRC applications. However, it did not directly address the committee's broader criticism that the overall consultation response was minimal or ignored areas of majority support for change.

The government's response discusses the digitisation of the GRC application process, which is unrelated to the committee's call for ministerial cooperation and compliance with accountability procedures.

The government's response details progress on digitising the GRC application process, which does not address the recommendation to remove the requirement for a gender dysphoria diagnosis.

The government rejects removing the diagnosis of gender dysphoria from the Gender Recognition Act, stating its current position is appropriate and that diagnosis requirements ensure a robust process. It will amend the reference to 'disorder' but not the diagnosis requirement itself, and highlights existing safeguards.

The government rejected the recommendation to remove the requirement to have lived in the acquired gender, stating its September 2020 position on evidential requirements in the GRA remains appropriate and robust. They clarified that the assessment relies on routine documentary evidence rather than gender stereotypes.

The government rejects amending the wording of the statutory declaration, stating that its current position, including the evidential and diagnosis requirements in the Gender Recognition Act, strikes the correct balance and ensures a robust process.

The government rejected the committee's implicit recommendation that spousal consent or annulment should not cause delay in obtaining a GRC. It maintained that its existing position, set out in September 2020, is correct, asserting that the current legislation strikes the right balance with proper checks and balances.

The government's response commits to engaging fully with the Committee and building a constructive relationship, which does not address the recommendation to remove the spousal consent requirement for a Gender Recognition Certificate.

The government's response did not address the committee's conclusion agreeing that 18 is the appropriate age for legal gender recognition. Instead, it provided a generic statement acknowledging the importance of committee engagement and committing to a constructive relationship.

The government acknowledges the need for improved support, detailing ongoing evaluation of pilot clinics to inform a new service model for adults and reiterating its commitment to investing in general mental health services through the NHS Long Term Plan, but not specific new actions for young people.

The government rejects the recommendation to replace the Gender Recognition Panel or conduct a review of its structure, stating it is satisfied the Panel is fulfilling its duties and that a replacement would not be appropriate. It highlights existing efforts to simplify the application process.

The government's response did not address the recommendation to amend Section 22 of the Gender Recognition Act to cover only deliberate and knowing disclosures. Instead, it reiterated its view that the overall diagnosis requirements in the GRA are robust and appropriate.

The government's response states its view on the appropriateness of diagnosis requirements in the GRA, which does not address the recommendation to publish guidance on single-sex/separate-sex exceptions and trans/non-binary inclusive services.

The government redirected the recommendation for the GEO to conduct a review into occupational requirement exceptions, stating that the EHRC has committed to issuing separate guidance on these provisions. It did not commit to the broader scope of a review, making recommendations, or setting targets requested by the committee.

The government notes that the EHRC is currently looking to update its guidance on single-sex exceptions in the Equality Act. However, it does not commit to the specific recommendation for EHRC and GEO to work with various groups to publish supplementary guidance or develop comprehensive guidance for trans-inclusive sports spaces.

The government reiterated its view that the position set out in September 2020 is appropriate and that GRA evidential requirements ensure a robust legal gender recognition process, but did not address the recommendation on updating language in acts and official documents.

The government reiterated its view that the position set out in September 2020 is appropriate and that GRA evidential requirements ensure a robust legal gender recognition process, but did not address the recommendation on developing data collection guidelines.

The government states NHSEI is committed to commissioning a new adult service model and evaluating pilot clinics to inform permanent commissioning. They are working to move services in the South West to a new model by 2023, and reference existing mental health funding and ongoing GEO collaboration with DHSC, partially addressing the geographical and service provision requests.

The government accepted the recommendation, committing DHSC to provide annual updates on pilot clinics and their impact on waiting times. It outlined new pilot clinics for holistic care, including psychological services, established regional professional support services, and allocated an additional £500 million for mental health services to address waiting times and workforce.

The government's response did not address the recommendation for DHSC and NHS England to attract more trainee doctors to specialise in gender identity healthcare. Instead, it discussed the necessity and retention of the statutory declaration requirement for GRC applications.

The government's response discusses the necessity of a statutory declaration for gender recognition and does not address the committee's concerns about the Government Equalities Office's work on transgender and non-binary primary healthcare.

The government's response defines the term 'spouse' and does not address the recommendation to develop a healthcare strategy for transgender and non-binary people.

The government's response defines the term 'spouse' and does not address the recommendation to commit to the LGBT Action Plan or reinstate the LGBT Advisory Panel.

The government stated its position that no changes are needed to the Gender Recognition Act (GRA), asserting that UK law defines individuals as male or female on their birth certificate. While acknowledging its previous work exploring experiences of VSC and non-binary people, the government essentially rejected the recommendation to clarify barriers to legal recognition for non-binary people, by stating it won't be implementing such changes.