Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Law changes to strengthen women's rights by rewriting the Equality Act on the basis of biological sex instead of gender identity might not take place until next summer

87 replies

IwantToRetire · 10/09/2023 16:40

The project to rewrite part of the Equality Act on the basis of biological sex rather than gender identity was proposed by equalities minister Kemi Badenoch in February.

The Equality and Human Rights Commission backed the idea in April, saying it would bring 'greater legal clarity' in eight different areas including allowing organisers to prevent transgender women from entering female-only spaces such as single-sex wards or sports teams.

But it has now emerged that the Cabinet Office has only recently advertised for a civil servant to work on the project – and specifies that it will not be completed until next July.

Whitehall job ad posted internally in August offered up to £75,000 for an official to take charge of the clarification of equality law.

It stated: 'The post is needed to lead a new team established within the Equality Hub at the Minister for Women and Equalities' request. One of the major deliverables is a complex legislative project that is due to be completed by July 2024.

'This is a role to consider whether and how legislative changes to the Equality Act 2010 could be made. This project is intended to be completed by end July 2024.'

Campaigners believe the change required to the law is only a simple tweak, however, and want it to be carried out urgently. They believe a piece of secondary legislation known as a statutory instrument – which would not have to be voted on by MPs or peers – would suffice. It could introduce a definition of women to the Equality Act, stating that it means those who were born female – and not those who were born male but legally changed sex by obtaining a Gender Recognition Certificate.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12494299/Law-changes-strengthen-womens-rights-rewriting-Equality-Act-basis-biological-sex-instead-gender-identity-not-place-summer.html

This was published a couple of days ago, and I did nto see or hear anything about it.

In the article it makes it sound like the Tories are committed to making this change, but I thought at the end of the Westminster Hall debate they just made some vague comment about having to look at it further.

Worrying that it will be an internal appointment given that civil servants have been Stonewalled.

I suspect like many of the articles in the DM and the DT and even TT this is another leak by a faction and / or to get public response so the Government can gauge level of interest, vote winner etc..

Law changes for women's rights might not take place until next summer

The project to rewrite part of the Equality Act on the basis of biological sex rather than gender identity was proposed by equalities minister Kemi Badenoch (pictured) in February.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12494299/Law-changes-strengthen-womens-rights-rewriting-Equality-Act-basis-biological-sex-instead-gender-identity-not-place-summer.html

OP posts:
Original poster
IwantToRetire · 11/09/2023 00:23

Its hard to know with all these different versions of what is going on to be sure of anything, although the job ad does sound real. Wonder why it is an internal ad. To stop campaigners infiltrating.

I dont understand why it should take so long. Someone with legal knowledge surely presents amended wording that would clarify that sex mean biology. MPs are then asked to vote on it.

I recognise that there are sections that would need to changed, eg the single sex exmpemptions would not be needed, but there may need to be exemptions the other way round (which is what it should have been to begin with) when trans women can be included.

But again MPs would just vote on it.

Why wouldn't they want to use their majority to get this through. Dragging it out like this will just mean it will then be added to all the things the Tories haven't accomplished.

Or is this because in fact there are many more trans allies among the Tories than any of us are aware. Meaning they cant be sure of a majority and would prefer unfinished business to a defeat in the Hoc?

OP posts:
PencilsInSpace · 10/09/2023 23:30

When the law was changing on a daily basis during covid - that was all statutory instruments.

PencilsInSpace · 10/09/2023 23:28

In the article it makes it sound like the Tories are committed to making this change, but I thought at the end of the Westminster Hall debate they just made some vague comment about having to look at it further.

That's all that can be expected of a petition debate. The motion they vote on is always simply that this house has considered the petition.

It was still a huge step forward when you consider the quality of the debate compared with the unopposed dross that they were coming out with a few years ago.

Original poster
IwantToRetire · 10/09/2023 23:26

Not sure on the need for the second link. Of course the Equality Act could be amended by primary legislation. Like every other Act.

Sorry I wasn't clear but have to admit I am useless in this heat and haven't been able to think straight.

What I had meant to write but missed the bit I hadn't thought of, which was that an ammendment to the EA is happening because an individual member won a slot in proposing a Private members bill.

I wonder is any MPs would do something similar re definition of sex in EA, or would they not now be allowedt to do that ie MPs just voting on the proposal of a Private Members bill, rather than all this civil servant having to look at pros and cons and so on.

And in response to another post I am not sure why a public consultation would be part of that. There have been 2 petitions with differing view points. The issue is now how many MPs would vote either way.

Although can see if whatever wording the civil servant (yet to be appointed) comes up with some nonsensical wording that leaves everything open to interpretation again, that this would be another delay.

Everyone knows what the issue is.

Its whether, assuming they ever get the chance, MPs will vote for a wording that states clearing that sex mean the biological sex that you were born.

OP posts:
Original poster
IwantToRetire · 10/09/2023 23:14

Villagetoraiseachild · 10/09/2023 22:41

What is SI, @southbiscay ?

From the article:

They believe a piece of secondary legislation known as a statutory instrument – which would not have to be voted on by MPs or peers – would suffice. It could introduce a definition of women to the Equality Act, stating that it means those who were born female – and not those who were born male but legally changed sex by obtaining a Gender Recognition Certificate.

I think this is meant to explain them but I wasn't really clear https://www.parliament.uk/site-information/glossary/statutory-instruments-sis/

OP posts:
Villagetoraiseachild · 10/09/2023 22:41

What is SI, @southbiscay ?

southbiscay · 10/09/2023 22:26

I know Sex Matters want it done by SI but imo there is no way the government will risk doing this as it is too contentious. They will also want to look at the whole thing to avoid (further) unintended consequences. And to just edit in SM's request would look as bad as editing it for Stonewall. All in all it's highly unlikely to be done this term or (under Labour) next term.

The fight goes on.

Slothtoes · 10/09/2023 22:05

It just means that nothing will happen before the 2024 GE. They know that. It’s just a way to be able to say in the run up to an election that something is being done while nothing that would make any difference is actually being done. Expect to hear lots about how terribly complicated it all is and can’t be rushed etc.

EasternStandard · 10/09/2023 21:43

Good to see it’s still progressing

Although hopefully the CS won’t be too gender ID in views

PlanetJanette · 10/09/2023 21:34

IwantToRetire · 10/09/2023 17:50

If this did happen wouldn't it make the need to clarify gender id policies in schools redundant because the amended EA would make it clear that sex means biological sex?

Also just spotted this which shows that the EA can be amended as shown here https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9619/

Not sure on the need for the second link. Of course the Equality Act could be amended by primary legislation. Like every other Act.

PlanetJanette · 10/09/2023 21:33

Nonsense article. The job ad referred to is not to deliver legislative change. It is to lead a project considering whether and how to amend the Equality Act.

In other words to run stakeholder engagement and public consultation. Not to deliver legislation.

Given that the project is due to finish next summer, legislation would not even be introduced until Autumn at the earliest (and that’s assuming a massively quick turnaround of primary legislation which is not impossible but usually only done for absolute priorities).

So the mails excitement of legislation on this by next Summer is misplaced - it is confirmation that legislation will not be in place before the next general election.

Original poster
IwantToRetire · 10/09/2023 17:50

If this did happen wouldn't it make the need to clarify gender id policies in schools redundant because the amended EA would make it clear that sex means biological sex?

Also just spotted this which shows that the EA can be amended as shown here https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9619/

OP posts: