Source · Select Committees · Women and Equalities Committee
Recommendation 17
17
Paragraph: 135
Transparency around the operation and decision-making of the Gender Recognition Panel is a concern to...
Recommendation
Transparency around the operation and decision-making of the Gender Recognition Panel is a concern to many people applying for a Gender Recognition Certificate. It is clear to us that the existence of the Panel itself can, at times, discourage people from applying for a GRC. We believe that another system should exist in place of the Gender Recognition Panel which allows for greater transparency. We note Scotland’s proposed changes to replace the Gender Recognition Panel with the Registrar General for Scotland and we believe this could be a move in the right direction. We heard conflicting evidence on whether the Gender Recognition Panel is providing the feedback that it is supposed to. We recommend that the Government conduct a review on whether the Gender Recognition Panel could be removed and replaced with the Registrar General for England and Wales, who already has a number of existing functions under the Gender Recognition Act. In the interim, more needs to be done to improve the transparency around the operation and role of the Panel. The GEO should satisfy itself that the Panel is carrying out its feedback requirements in line with the GRA and provide reassurance in response to this report. We recommend that the Government conduct a review on whether the Gender Recognition Panel could be removed and replaced with the Registrar General for England and Wales, who already has a number of existing functions under the Gender Recognition Act. In the interim, more needs to be done to improve the transparency around the operation Reform of the Gender Recognition Act 75 and role of the Panel. The GEO should satisfy itself that the Panel is carrying out its feedback requirements in line with the GRA and provide reassurance in response to this report
Paragraph Reference:
135
Government Response
Not Addressed
HM Government
Not Addressed
33. We are satisfied that the Gender Recognition Panel is fulfilling its duties and we will not be amending its structure. Since its inception in 2005, the Panel has refused less than 5% of applications. This does not suggest that the hurdles are too great, or that the system is unsuitable. 34. The Panel is made up of existing Tribunal Judges and medical experts. It would not be appropriate for the Registrar General for England and Wales to take on this function, given that the evidence submitted requires independent judicial consideration and the need to be able to deal with legal issues such as in relation to appeals. Currently the General Register Office’s role in relation to GRCs is in keeping the Register and issuing new birth certificates. It is not set up to consider applications which involve the sort of assessment of documents required by the GRA. As to the recommendation that the Register Office nullify a marriage, considerable legislative change would be necessary to allow this with appropriate consideration of potential human rights issues. 35. We do not accept that there is any lack of transparency. The Panel President’s name appears on the public website. The names of the Panel members sitting on each panel are set out in panel directions and decisions - though those decisions are not made public because of the level of privacy the Act rightly requires for applicants themselves and that is also appropriate for individuals working on such sensitive casework. 36. Reasons for the decision are provided to all applicants. Detailed feedback is only required for those few applications that are not successful, which as highlighted above, is less than 5% of applications. Such feedback may assist an applicant in making a further application. 37. The Gender Recognition Panel administration team supports applicants in their applications through email, telephone and written correspondence. People who responded to the 2018 consultation who had gone through the application process commended the time and support that the administration team put into helping their applications. There is no evidence that care and support is not appropriately provided by the team to applicants going through this process. 38. The 2018 consultation identified areas where there were opportunities to improve the process and experience of transgender people applying for a GRC. We have already worked to make the application process more straightforward by reducing the fee from £140 to £5 and are in the process of digitising and simplifying it, identifying and tackling any misconceptions as an integral part of this work.