A SCOTTISH Parliament survey has exposed a wider problem with collecting data on the basis of biological sex and could undermine “decades worth” of work on women’s representation, an expert has said.
Kevin Guyan, a writer and researcher whose work explores the intersection of data and identity, told The National that the refusal of a majority of MSPs to respond to a survey – where they were asked to declare their sex and transgender status – was a “told you so moment”.
The Chancellor’s Fellow at the University of Edinburgh argued that Holyrood bosses can do “nothing" with the data and warned that the impact could be much wider.
Engender, a Scottish feminist organisation, said they were concerned that a previously simple measure used to track women’s representation in Holyrood has been “mired in a manufactured controversy” and led to some MSPs feeling unsafe to share their data.
None of the 15 Scottish Green MSPs took part in the survey, with the party stating that there was “no clear need” for the data to be published on the Parliament’s website.
A spokesperson added: “It was also already clear that bad-faith actors would be weaponising this information against women and trans people.”
But the issue was cross-party, with 67 MSPs – a majority – not responding.
The survey was the first time the Scottish Parliament has had to collect the data following the Supreme Court ruled that “woman” under the Equality Act 2010 refers to biological sex, not gender.
For Women Scotland, who took the case to the UK’s highest court, accused the Greens of being “performative” and “petty” by not taking part.
Guyan told The National that the Scottish Parliament example undermined claims from gender critical groups that the ruling would “create better data”.
“Actually their demand that all data needs to be collected about biological sex at birth will actually have the effect of ruining decades worth of amazing feminist gender equality work around data,” he said.
“For me, the example of the Scottish Parliament is probably one of the first cases where I've seen that actually play out in reality.
“We've gone from a situation where we had an increasing amount of detailed data on gender representation in Parliament around MSPs, committee chairs, all that breakdown, 100% completion, and now that data is basically worthless.
“They can do nothing with that data at all.”
Guyan added that by “embracing” the language of “biological sex assigned at birth” rather than gender, people will generally feel less comfortable taking part.
“Understandably people for a variety of different reasons are not going to share that information because it's not particularly relevant to the work they're doing in parliament,” he said.
“And we'll see that across other types of data collection practices now, because a lot of this is around trust and trusting how your data is going to be used.
“I get the impression there are a significant amount of MSPs [that] have basically lost trust that data is not going to be used in a way to harass, target, or inflict harm on particular parliamentarians.”
Guyan said it was “understandable” that the Scottish Greens – who have Holyrood’s first two transgender MSPs – chose not to take part.
“It's a kind of form of data vandalism,” Guyan added.
“Basically, they've ruined something that served a lot of purposes, whether it was for journalists or for researchers, for students.
“Actually, really helpful data to have, and this approach has basically ruined that dataset that's now non-functioning.
“When more than half of MSPs haven't disclosed, we can't really make anything from that data.”
Guyan also raised concerns about the Scottish Parliament's use of the Gender Sensitive Audit (GSA) to explain its actions around the issue, as the report contains no suggestion to survey MSPs on their sex and trans status.
Cat Murphy, executive director at Engender, also shared concerns about the impact of collecting data on the basis of biological sex.
"We are increasingly concerned about the chilling effect that is emerging around equalities and feminist policy making,” she told The National.
“It’s being driven by culture wars and a deeply toxic public debate that fails to recognise the bigger issues at stake.
“The recent issues with data collection in parliament are an example of this. A much-needed measure that was developed to help track representation of women and minorities in our parliament, has been mired in a manufactured controversy.”
Murphy said some MSPs felt “unsafe” sharing their data, adding: “It has also threatened to undermine a whole range of measures devised to improve how parliament attracts and retains women MSPs.
“This was hardly a win for equality and should be a wake up call for anyone that cares about these issues in Scotland."
A Scottish Parliament spokesperson said diversity data is published on its website to "inform the public about their elected representatives"
"This data is an important part of understanding and monitoring the representative make up of the Parliament," a spokesperson added.
“A diversity monitoring survey was issued to Members in June, in line with recommendations in the Parliament’s Gender Sensitive Audit (GSA) report of March 2023.
“This process ensures that relevant diversity information is confirmed directly with individual MSPs before use. As part of the survey on sex and trans status, we have sought consent from each Member to use this information to populate the search filter for MSPs on the Parliament’s website.
“The Parliament is fully committed to publishing diversity information in line with legal requirements."
