The SNP minister behind Scotland’s gender recognition reforms has insisted the UK Government has provided no “showstopper” in its attempt to block the legislation – stressing she has nothing to fear in a court battle over the Bill.

It comes after First Minister Nicola Sturgeon confirmed the Scottish Government will seek a judicial review to halt the UK Government’s attempt to veto the legislation, warning that “it will inevitably end up in court”.

The Scottish Government’s Civil Justice Secretary, Shona Robison, criticised UK Scottish Secretary Alister Jack after he pushed forward his section 35 order to block the Scottish Parliament’s gender recognition reforms.

The plans, backed by all parties except the Tories, would remove the need for a gender dysphoria diagnosis for train people to obtain a gender recognition certificate and reduce the lower age limit to 16.

Speaking to The Herald, Ms Robison said that Mr Jack “needs to get his story straight” over whether Scotland can roll out its own system at all, adding that the only amendment to the proposals under the UK Government’s terms would be “reverting to the previous system and therefore scrapping the Bill”.

Read More: Alister Jack claims UK will 'not veto Holyrood Bills when it chooses'

Speaking frankly at Holyrood, the minister said the UK Government "does not like this bill, does not want this bill and will do everything to block this bill".

She added: "The decision they have taken is political and it is a sad day for democracy and for devolution."

It comes after Mr Jack told MPs in the House of Commons that he had concerns about two different gender recognition systems running in parallel across the UK, suggesting that any system rolled out by Holyrood would not meet his standards.

Mr Jack said that the legislation “risks creating significant complications from having two different gender recognition regimes in the UK”.

He said that “it is open to the Scottish Government to bring back an amended Bill for reconsideration in the Scottish Parliament”.

Speaking to The Herald, Ms Robison said: “My initial look at the statement of reasons doesn't give me any particular concern that there's something that we had missed or was it was a showstopper.

Read More: Tory Section 35 order a 'dark day for trans rights'

“I thought it was very telling that Alister Jack was unable to answer I think essentially, most of the questions put to him by Westminster colleagues of all parties.

“He also held out this idea of amendments being able to be brought to the Bill but then in the next breath said that there could never be two different systems of gender recognition within the UK, which completely contradicts the idea of being able to amend our legislation.

“So I think he really needs to get his story straight.”

The UK Government has also set out concerns with the Scottish system expanding the ability to obtain a gender recognition certificate to more people.

The statement of reasons for taking the unprecedented action, published by the UK Government points to the threshold to obtain a gender recognition certificate “from one that is very hard to meet” to a system “that is far more dependent on an applicant’s personal judgement”.

Labour’s shadow Scottish secretary, Ian Murray, labelled the reasoning “pretty weak and pretty flimsy”.

The document argues that “given the significantly increased possibility of someone with malicious intent being able to obtain a GRC” under the plans agreed by the Scottish Parliament, “there is a related risk of people no longer feeling safe in any sex-segregated setting and self-excluding from such settings even though they could significantly benefit from them”.

The UK Government argues that the Bill would “exacerbate” concerns, adding that “the increased numbers of GRC holders” would mean “these issues and constraints would be encountered more often”.

Read More: Nicola Sturgeon confirms judicial review bid over gender reforms veto

Ms Robison said that based on projections following similar proposals being rolled out in Ireland, the Scottish Government is expecting “a small increase” in the number of people applying for a gender recognition certificate.

She added: “When you consider the really still very, very small numbers in a UK context, the idea that that tiny number of people would have some major impact on services in England and Wales, I think is a bit of a stretch in terms of that argument.”

Asked if any amendment could be introduced by the Scottish Parliament to meet Mr Jack’s requests, Mr Robison said that was “a puzzle”.

She added: “If he says there can't be two different systems of gender recognition reform, but somehow we can tweak or amend the Bill and not affect the principles and effectively to have only one system of gender recognition, that would mean us reverting to the previous system and therefore scrapping the Bill.

“So I think Alister Jack needs to explain what he means by that because he's put two completely contradictory statements.

“And perhaps the offer of amendments and meetings could be seen as a bit of a fig leaf perhaps when actually the reality of what his stated is that we cannot have two different systems. It really I think, exposes that for what it is.”