Your analogy with trans/gender and the pitfalls of treating a complex matter as 'the next big progressive cause' is very good. And like there, importantly, even if opponents are coming from different starting places, there are numerous specific cases they can agree are bad.
I'm pretty sceptical that any law can be made watertight - at lea…
Your analogy with trans/gender and the pitfalls of treating a complex matter as 'the next big progressive cause' is very good. And like there, importantly, even if opponents are coming from different starting places, there are numerous specific cases they can agree are bad.
I'm pretty sceptical that any law can be made watertight - at least so long as we are in the ECHR, which is likely to lead courts to strike down exceptions. But if I were to be won over, it would probably be by establishing something like the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Agency to oversee it, a genuinely cross-spectrum Royal Commission to design it, and then - as you say - lots of consultation and scrutiny to get it right.
The analogy with the trans/gender issue is misleading. There was extensive and lengthy consultation in the Scottish Parliament on the Gender Recognition Bill, and support from MSPs of all parties. It was the Westminster government and Parliament which intervened to block the bill, totally ignoring the wishes of the Scottish Parliament and the consultation which had already taken place.
There is an parallel bill on assisted dying now being considered by Holyrood. If the Scottish bill passes and the Westminster bill falls, will we again see the Westminster government stepping in to overrule the will of the Scottish Parliament and people?
Your analogy with trans/gender and the pitfalls of treating a complex matter as 'the next big progressive cause' is very good. And like there, importantly, even if opponents are coming from different starting places, there are numerous specific cases they can agree are bad.
I'm pretty sceptical that any law can be made watertight - at least so long as we are in the ECHR, which is likely to lead courts to strike down exceptions. But if I were to be won over, it would probably be by establishing something like the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Agency to oversee it, a genuinely cross-spectrum Royal Commission to design it, and then - as you say - lots of consultation and scrutiny to get it right.
The analogy with the trans/gender issue is misleading. There was extensive and lengthy consultation in the Scottish Parliament on the Gender Recognition Bill, and support from MSPs of all parties. It was the Westminster government and Parliament which intervened to block the bill, totally ignoring the wishes of the Scottish Parliament and the consultation which had already taken place.
There is an parallel bill on assisted dying now being considered by Holyrood. If the Scottish bill passes and the Westminster bill falls, will we again see the Westminster government stepping in to overrule the will of the Scottish Parliament and people?