Is GRR row convenient 'culture war' diversion from Government's woes?

Most people, many journalists included, will not have heard of Section 35 of the Scotland Act until this week.

I’m willing to suggest that not all 129 MSPs had heard of it until recently either.

But now, everyone has an opinion on Section 35 of the aforementioned Act.

READ MORE: Sturgeon: gender reform bill will be defended "vigorously" in court

It’s like when a Section 30 order was needed for the 2014 referendum to go ahead and when it was refused last year, leading to the Supreme Court hearing.

It looks like the row over the UK Government issuing a Section 35 order over the Gender Recognition Reform Bill will go the same way.

The reason most people have not heard of a Section 35 is it has never, in more than 20 years of devolution, been used.

So, why now?

Of all the bills passed by Holyrood that have become law in Scotland, with no quibbles from Westminster about them getting Royal Assent, why is this the one for the UK Government to issue an attempt to block?

Scottish secretary Alister Jack, Scotland’s man in Westminster or Westminster’s man in Scotland – depending on your opinion of the UK Government’s approach to devolution – said it is not about a veto.

READ MORE: Glasgow will not "rush" to change city street names linked to slavery

He said: “We should be clear that this is absolutely not about the United Kingdom Government being able to veto Scottish Parliament legislation whenever it chooses, as some have implied.”

However, it has been stated that it looks like there is no clear legal basis for Section 35, and rather it is that the UK Government simply doesn’t like the law.

It is also clear there are many people who will back the UK Government in attempting to block it.

It is, however, whether people agree with the content or not, a bill passed after the full democratic parliamentary process was followed.

It looks to many to be the UK Government asserting its authority over a devolved parliament at a time when tensions between the two are already heightened.

In the war of words, Nicola Sturgeon hit back stating the principle of democracy is at stake.

She said: “The Scottish Government will vigorously defend this legislation [and] the ability of MSPs – democratically elected – to legislate in areas of our competence.”

What was previously a debate about trans rights, women’s rights and equal rights has taken on a new dimension and become another constitutional row about devolution, democracy and the right of a devolved parliament to take decisions.

READ MORE: Cost of living: How Glasgow families can claim £49 energy payment

Could there be another reason for this intervention?

One that, while instigated by the UK administration, could suit both governments.

The UK Government is under pressure over the cost-of-living crisis, strikes and the NHS.

The Scottish Government is also under the microscope over its governance of the NHS and teacher strikes.

From a Westminster perspective, Rishi Sunak’s government has already tried diversionary tactics over the strikes in the railways and public sectors.

Trying to split the country into “hard-working people” and “greedy strikers” it is attempting to bring in a law that will make it more difficult to take strike action.

It has been argued this is a tactic to demonise workers exercising their right to strike and deflect from their concerns over how their sector is being run from the top down and how they are being paid.

Has it been calculated that a row between the UK Government and Scottish Government –which will be portrayed as between the Conservatives and the SNP, when it is actually the Scottish Parliament (Labour, LibDems and Greens all backed the GRR Bill) – will do the UK Government no harm in stoking a culture war dispute?

It also gives the Scottish Government an opportunity to repeat the ‘democracy denier’ lines.

The GRR Bill has been one of the most debated pieces of legislation in the Scottish Parliament.

It has been the subject of huge public debate and has been years in the making.

The argument now that it impacts matters reserved to the UK under the devolution settlement and will not be consistent with the UK Equality Act is seemingly a new entrant to the debate.

What it does is it allows politicians, on both sides of this constitutional conundrum, to do what they often do best.

While the country is gripped by a cost-of-living crisis, where the most basic essentials have rocketed in price...

While workers in a number of occupations are taking strike action for better pay...

While the NHS is by its own admission at breaking point...

While all this, and more, is going on we will have governments arguing (at great expense) inside court and politicians indulging in a vicious verbal contest outside.