EHRC urge government to lay the updated statutory guidance before parliament

It's important to note that what was removed was the interim update (what the GLP incorrectly calls interim guidance), not the actual interim guidance. The interim update is non-statutory, and was provided at the request of some in parliament for an immediate response to the SC ruling. The interim guidance is statutory and provided directly due to the SC ruling and replaces previous issued guidance.

Removing the interim update is due to the fact that interim guidance is now available to MPs. Although the GLP claims that it's due to the pressure applied by their lawsuit. And it is plausible that's an additional factor given that it's quite possible that if the laying of the new interim guidance was not controversial the update would have stayed up until the new guidance came into effect.

It's important to keep these things clear as the GLP is intentionally trying to confuse them as part of its activist strategy. Hopefully others will correct or amend the above if I've misstated or omitted anything.

Sad times

https://x.com/akuareindorf/status/1978459025667658143?

I hope we get to see that EQI

Thanks for the link. The relevant answers, at the end:

Baroness Falkner of Margravine
(CB)

My Lords, I have enormous respect for the Minister, who has given very fulsome answers today. He referred to me. Therefore, I would just like to clarify for the House, because I know the Minister would not wish to mislead the House, that the time period needed for the code to be laid in Parliament is not 40 sitting days: it is 40 calendar days under Section 15 of the Equality Act. The further point that I want to clarify is that we were asked to provide the equality impact assessment last Friday. We provided it to the Government on Monday. We are here to serve the Government with any information that they need at pace.

Lord Collins of Highbury
(Lab)

As the noble Baroness knows, I have huge respect for her and the responsibility she has. It is a very serious responsibility. From her letter to the Secretary of State today and the debate we have had this afternoon, it is clear that we have to consider this matter seriously and take into account all possible risks and issues to ensure that we have a legally proofed code that is understood by everyone in respect of their responsibilities under the Equality Act. In respect of the 40 days, I must admit that my briefing does say 40 sitting days—but I am prepared to be corrected and I thank the noble Baroness.

I think we should all be reading the detailed transcript before we leap to that conclusion..

https://hansard.parliament.uk/lords/2025-10-15/debates/2301BEA8-6127-4813-AB98-D23F16846E09/EqualityAct2010MeaningOf“Sex”

Ooh! I thought it was 40 sitting days.

Anyway, Bridget is obviously hoping to kick it into the post-deputy leader election grass.

EHRC interim guidance has apparently been removed from website - related?

GLP seems to think the rapture has arrived.

Therefore, I would just like to clarify for the House, because I know the Minister would not wish to mislead the House, that the time period needed for the code to be laid in Parliament is not 40 sitting days: it is 40 calendar days under Section 15 of the Equality Act

That's a useful distinction