Phillipson criticised over women’s rights stance in sex and gender debate

What does " being laid before parliament" imply.....what is involved?

Don't assume that parliamentary time would automatically be given over to a debate & vote. I don't know if there has ever been a parliamentary vote on the guidance previously as it's normally just accepted by the Secretary of State & laid before parliament for 40 days.

That is what I suspected. Given Labour's large majority, we'd have to hope that enough Labour MPs see sense and don't vote to dismiss it. Should there be such a vote, then we do need to take an invenory of which MPs reject the guidance. Inevitably there will be Lib Dems, Greens and SNP MPs who would also vote to dismiss.

Phillipson has approved the guidance & committed to laying it before parliament next month.

That's not quite the case. The guidance is laid before both Houses for 40 days and is then approved unless there is a majority vote in favour of a motion of disapproval in either House.

Too late for us to vote them out by then, though!

Well, that's good news if it is the case.

The guidance is simply laid before parliament for 40 days and then becomes statutory. There is no vote, though no doubt there will be pressure to hold one (even though it will not be binding) to enable some grandstanding by the usual mob.

It will be instructive to make a note of who votes against the updated guidance when it comes to pass later in the year.

So if I'm reading it right she's finally going to do it, in May after the elections, but she's going to do it. Right?

"We are getting it right, showing leadership by implementing the clarity the Supreme Court ruling delivers."

There's that bullshit leadership thing again. 🤬

Thank you @DameProfessorIDareSay
I have seen a press release from the EHRC since as well. MAS says "The UK government recently provided us with a narrow set of comments on the draft Code of Practice we submitted in September". So EHRC keen to clarify that BP has indeed beem sat on it for months, and they turned around her comments quickly.

https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-statements/detail/2026-04-14/hcws1509

Any update on the public statement? I can't find anything but may not be looking in the right places.

There's no way Phillipson is sitting on this without Starmer being okay with the delay. He either agrees with what the real reason is (twaw mps, twaw unions, twaw themselves?) or he's too frit/spineless to disagree with her.

Apparently it will be a written statement so I’m expecting another round of ‘this is very important to get right’ as they fail to read and digest 11 fucking pages 😡

At 12.30, are we going to find out if Labour are more frit of the Greens or Reform?

Ooh, I hope that doorsteps have been ringing with the voices of indignant women giving chastened Labour canvassers the what-for on account of the delayed guidance.

Statement at 12.30 allegedly...

https://x.com/RosieDuffield1/status/2043969903460327711?s=20

"And lo, a local election miracle came to pass, and all of the imagined, self-imposed and fear-based excuses for the last year of delay dissolved like mist made of empty political spin to reveal a Statement in the House on the ERHC guidance Hallelujah"

Statement at 12.30 allegedly...

https://x.com/RosieDuffield1/status/2043969903460327711?s=20

"And lo, a local election miracle came to pass, and all of the imagined, self-imposed and fear-based excuses for the last year of delay dissolved like mist made of empty political spin to reveal a Statement in the House on the ERHC guidance Hallelujah"

Important note.

Scottish Labour have openly broken with Westminster on this see their manifesto which commits to supporting biological sex multiple times in forthright language. Sarwar said in the press conference launch that he was supporting the result of the Supreme Court verdict. Thread here:
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5516606-scottish-labour-manifesto-commits-to-single-sex-spaces

This makes Phillipson look ridiculous. Also bear in mind the Home Secretary is very firmly in the women exist camp. The biology is real group is too powerful for the TAs to get much of what they want.

I think Phillipson is trying to hedge and find a non existent middle way because Labour has a lot of TA fanatics who can't admit they were wrong. It is the same thing facing Wes Streeting who just published in Pink News saying how much he loved trans kids and got loads more hate.

A chunk of Labour want to be nice. That ship has sailed.

I suspect Philipson is waiting till after the May elections to drop the news. I think it might be some kind of absurd mishmash which will say biology is real, but also use mixed up language or something.

Labour have now had over a year to implement the very clear ruling. They don't want to. Yet again my mind boggles at how a very small percentage of people (trans gender) have managed to get their ideology taken seriously and got so many on board with the madness. It's like The Emperor's New Clothes.

Two items of interest in Parliament this afternoon:

An oral question in the Lords just after 2.30pm on the EHRC guidance, from Lord Rooker (Labour and terfy).

There is also a Westminster Hall debate at 2.30pm on the 'First anniversary of the For Women Scotland v The Scottish Ministers ruling’ , DUP’s Carla Lockhart is the instigator (very terfy!).

Both available on Parliament TV.

Phillipson is supposed to meet FWS this week, perhaps she is finally going to be shamed into action?