UK Census guidance on how to answer sex question must be rewritten, High Court rules

[stumbledin]

Campaigners argued that the guidance allowed “self-identification through the back door” because the sex on someone’s passport can be altered without legally changing gender first.
Mr Justice Swift on Tuesday ruled in favour of the campaigners, granting them interim relief and ordering that the guidance should be rewritten to remove the words “such as” and “passport”.
Mr Justice Swift also gave the green light for the case to proceed forward to a full judicial review, which could be heard as early as next week.
Fair Play For Women, which crowdfunded £100,000 to bring the legal challenge against the guidance, argued that withdrawing it now would be the “safer option” given that the Census will go live on March 21.
The court heard that three million people - around one fifth of households - have already filled the questionnaire online.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/03/09/uk-census-guidance-answer-sex-question-must-rewritten-high-court/

Fair Play for Women tweet thread twitter.com/fairplaywomen/status/1369230649425596416

Fair Play for Women have been brilliant for starting the court case and fantastic so many have contributed to the costs.

More and more women are having to face the facts that in the era of SM bullying campaigning doesn't always work. And we are having to rely on the court system - if we can afford it!

[RaininSummer]

This is great to hear but it's so shocking that we have to raise such huge sums to challenge it.

[peak2021]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56338666

So you can read more.

Hope the remaining stages of the court process continues with the same result.

[EmbarrassingAdmissions]

@RaininSummer

This is great to hear but it's so shocking that we have to raise such huge sums to challenge it.

And that is despite the generous donation of free services from some of the professionals involved.

The govt. has very deep pockets. I can only hope the OBR has a thorough investigation of the costs of the ONS' abrupt change of mind and the grounds/evidence for it.

[everythingthelighttouches]

This is brilliant news! Honestly, given the short timeframe, I didn’t think there would be a chance.

[Wrongsideofhistorymyarse]

Amazing

[MarciaDidia]

Does anyone know how much has been crowdfunded in the last few years to push back on gender ideology through courts or orgs like WPUK and FPFW? I'm guessing it must be close to half a million?

[CallforHecate]

🎉🍸👏👍

Congratulations to all involved, this is fabulous news.

[joystir59]

I filled the census in online. It asks two questions, one about sex and one about gender. I felt ok to answer the sex question 'femake' and the gender question ' prefer not to say'

[joystir59]

*female

[Snowball70]

great news 🎉

[334bu]

www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/swift-campaigners-office-for-national-statistics-census-high-court-b923116.html

[ItsAllGoingToBeFine]

I asked this in the other thread but it was moving really fast and I don't think it was answered. If ONS lose the judicial review can they take Stonewall et al to court for making them couch the guidance in those terms?

[Clymene]

@ItsAllGoingToBeFine

I asked this in the other thread but it was moving really fast and I don't think it was answered. If ONS lose the judicial review can they take Stonewall et al to court for making them couch the guidance in those terms?

I don't see they'd have a case. No one forced them to follow any advice they received, particularly when it contravenes U.K. law.

[BoogieFeet]

Great news!

[Leafstamp]

@peak2021

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56338666

So you can read more.

Hope the remaining stages of the court process continues with the same result.

The article is in the top ten most read. Would be nice if it were higher up but it is up against Harry and Meghan and I’m just glad it’s hitting mainstream news at all.

Well done FPFW.

[gardenbird48]

@ItsAllGoingToBeFine

I asked this in the other thread but it was moving really fast and I don't think it was answered. If ONS lose the judicial review can they take Stonewall et al to court for making them couch the guidance in those terms?

maybe they should ask for their money back under the Trade Descriptions Act - the product was not fit for purpose.

I keep thinking that surely deliberately and persistently misrepresenting the law to multiple public organisations and companies has to be unlawful.

[AlwaysColdHands]

So pleased to hear this and very grateful to FPW

[ChazsBrilliantAttitude]

If they lose the JR then there needs to be a proper investigation on how they got the law wrong in the first place.

[ChattyLion]

This is such a BRILLIANT result- thank you FPFW for bringing the sunlight. Everyone deserves to be counted properly and accurately in the census.
It is appalling that women have to bring these cases in order to make captured institutions do their jobs properly but thank you FPFW for doing it. I am so relieved that the census organisers will have to remake this undemocratic change.

[newyearnewname123]

Great news!!

[stumbledin]

I was wondering whether the 3 million forms already filled in will have to be scrapped and done again!

I think the ONS has to take responsibility. And also, for breaking the agreed start date of the census to try and use the fact that it was underway to undermine the case against them.

Any costs should be theirs. But suspect that because it is a Government department they will wriggle out of any blame.

What would be good is if the ONS then turns round and says well actually we framed the question that way because X or Y told us we had to follow the Stonewall guidance!

We need to know who is allowing / encouraging this attempt by stealth to erase the reality of women as a sex class.

[ErrolTheDragon]

Does this sensible decision in favour of meaningful statistics have any bearing on other official bodies which collect data which may inform policy and provision of services?

In particular, the recording of crimes by (as I understand it) completely self ID 'gender' rather than sex? By all means have sex plus an optional gender descriptor.

[TirisfalPumpkin]

Never underestimate the power of thousands of women brandishing tenners.

[Threadbaretoe]

Can someone explain the following from the BBC article:

"He [the judge] said he was satisfied the campaign group was "more likely than not to succeed" on its case regarding the legal meaning of sex as defined in the legislation.

This reads as though FPFW would not succeed. This doesn't seem to align with the rest of the article. Is this a 'typo'?

[ItsAllGoingToBeFine]

More likely than not. =

More likely to succeed than not to succeed