EHRC have suubmitted updated Code of Practice to Phillipson

I think the problem I have is that it is impossible to disprove the assertion that the guidance is really just an excuse for ensuring the law is as complicated as possible to ensure politicians, legal professionals and paid advocates never run out of work, It certainly hasn't benefited anyone else.

But thanks to all who tried 🙏

The courts will still enforce the law. Guidance helps lawyers, employers, service providers and the public understand how the law applies. For example, the guidance often gives examples which are often very helpful but wouldn't be provided in the law itself.

After the guidance is approved, if a court finds that there is a conflict between the legislation and the guidance, the court's interpretation of the legislation, not its interpretation of the guidance, would prevail.

The law says you must not drink and drive - that is the law, if you break it you might kill people and you might also be caught and punished.

The guidance tells you roughly on average how much someone can drink before they are over the limit. Being told how much you can drink is helpful to stop you breaking the law but you still break the law and can be punished even if the guidance didn’t exist or if you are small and petite and go over the limit at a lower level. It is guidance, not the law.

To clarify; this is by sex matters. I’m annoyed they’re not being accurate here.

It’s wasting time and money that some small businesses really don’t have

larger businesses have legal depts.

iirc there was a list of companies the gov wrote to to warn them of their duties but I’m not sure we ever got to learn who they are.

That;s never stopped a government before though.

(broken record)

So if you can enforce the law without the guidance .......

Yes they can. But it wastes a lot of money and time

Whilst all of this is absolutely disgusting, not all of it is linked to this code of practice for services:

The human impact

The booklet centres the voices of women who have experienced the consequences of this failure.It tells the stories of:

• a civil servant pushed out after raising concerns about policy compliance
• NHS staff disciplined for asserting sex-based boundaries
• women excluded from single-sex spaces — or penalised for objecting when those spaces are breached
• athletes facing unfair competition or sanctions for speaking out
• volunteers and carers deemed “unsuitable” for expressing mainstream safeguarding concerns.

They can and have enforced the law.

I’m puzzled as to why SM are writing/ campaigning about things the code doesn’t cover?

They say:

• workplaces, where employees are not being provided with adequate facilities and face disciplinary action for raising concerns
• healthcare, where the NHS is continuing to operate based on gender self-ID
• local services, including leisure centres, refuges, and social care, which are not respecting the law
• sport, where a two-tier system in some sports protects elite athletes but leaves most women competing against trans–identifying men
• charities that are still wedded to the idea that “inclusion” means ignoring women’s rights
• criminal justice and safeguarding systems, where accurate data and risk assessment depend on clarity about sex.

https://x.com/sexmattersorg/status/2042714570091856029?s=46&t=A2fpFNgDRyXF2d6ye97wEA

And yet:

“The code of practice, applies to services and associations. It doesn’t apply to the workplace regulations. So that really is a matter for the NHS… and how they intend to uphold their responsibilities as an employer”

https://www.personneltoday.com/hr/phillipson-updated-ehrc-code-does-not-apply-to-workplaces/

So until the guidance is published, the courts can't enforce the law ?

The 1992 Health and Safety Regulations are one example.

https://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/books/l24.htm

Here are some business regulations

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/business-regulation-guidance-and-tools

financial

https://handbook.fca.org.uk/home

Oh, well I guess the bible must be the guidance, thank god the EHRC guidance is a lot shorter, shame it's still taken Phillipson a year to read it. 😂

Yes, it did, but men with GRC's are still not covered under the protections afforded to the female Sex. This has already been done to death; now the government needs to grow a pair and issue clear guidance, including to the NHS and other state institutions, who continue to flout the ruling.

So where is the FAQs for all our other laws ?

I think it's a sort of posh FAQ page.

The only thing I can think of is that the SC ruling did stress that trans individuals had rights yada yada. They may have had to make sure it really was water tight there to avoid further court action.

As I understand it, the purpose of the Code of Practice is to give guidance and real life examples of putting the law into everyday practice. This is particularly important for small businesses and organisations who perhaps cannot afford individual legal advice.

It also should help the general public understand what they can expect from businesses and organisations, as it should be written in terms a layperson can easily understand.

Sex Matters has just opted that the 2006 Equalities Act makes no provision for ministers to amend the guidance. The act states that guidance is drafted by the EHRC, laid before Parliament and published. Potentially, therefore, Bridget Phillipson is acting illegally. I hope Sex Matters finds the funding to bring a case against her.

Apparently:

It helps organisations comply
before enforcement

Government enforcement isn’t just about punishing breaches; it’s about preventing them.

EHRC guidance:

• tells employers, schools, councils, etc. what they should do
• reduces accidental law-breaking
• creates a shared standard across the country

So fewer cases need enforcement in the first place.

Wanton chat gtp search but it makes sense to me tbh

That was a lawyer acting on her behalf. She didn’t write any of it and I’ve not met anyone who could make head nor tail of it tbh!

It was also likely a stress test. Testing the batshit theories of the GLP who were prepared to take it further.

No. That's the law.

And all any subsequent "guidance" has achieved is to explain how it's wrong for some reason or other.

Maybe not the best example ?

Chiselled in stone and brought down from a mountain. 😂