New Green council motion disagreeing with EHRC guidance on SSS

Completely agree they should uphold the law but the borough has very little single sex provision already so there isn't much to remove - it feels like an easy win for the council without having to do much

Waltham Forest like all London boroughs is a tier 1 authority (ie responsible for services like education, social care, housing, waste management etc) it may sub contract out services rather than provide directly but it still has a duty to ensure that all the services it commissions comply with the law

That would include for example social services which is a key one around single sex care and spaces

I do find it baffling (well I don't) that public bodies like local authorities, ICBs and the GLA think they can get away with hand waving and ssyong "oooh it would be too expensive to do anything about the services we commission that are breaking the law". Local authorities are required to comply with the law, these ones that don't end up in judicial review and sometimes court and lack of money is not a defence to non compliance with a local authority duty

I have asked if she can provide a list of different council services and services that are run by multiple councils.

I spoke to a friend who knows quite a bit about the workings of the council and she suggested that it would be best to start by actually identifying what single sex spaces / services the council have control of. She doesn't think there are many at all as most provision, even that should be single sex, is already not, or, that the provision is led by organisations with national or North East London / Greater London remits that the council cannot control.

She also said the council won't have the staffing or resourcing to go through tender processes again, have no control over the NHS services in WF, and don't have the capacity to move every service under the council to run.

She was also clear this isn't a good thing overall has the lack of single sex provision has a huge impact on women and attempting to remove the few offerings in the borough is going to have potentially dire consequences. IE potentially menopause cafes will no longer receive council funding or be able to run in council spaces or spaces which receive council funding.

I think I remember that - was it this: https://www.mylondon.news/news/east-london-news/woman-fights-aggressive-drunk-who-22184768

She managed to escape luckily.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/pubgoer-fights-drunk-sex-pest-25476772

I stand corrected - I've just been sent the link and it wasn't a sexual assault. It was in 2022 and a woman had to fight off a man trying to force his way into a toilet cubicle.

I've asked someone to give them to me as I didn't live in the borough at that time, it was just after COVID from what I understand there was a huge push from the community to ensure the toilets were redesigned following it.

Do you have the details of the incident on the beer mile please as I don't recall reading about that.

Will DM some things for you when I have some time later on

I do, I would say it's worth that I do think trans people deserve fair access to health care and community care but not at the expense of women accessing those spaces safely - and not by eroding single sex spaces for women.

The biggest issue that trans people in th borough are facing is not gender neutral toilets it's access to shared care within the NHS which every man and their dog are also facing at the moment. There is basically only one GP surgery who will provide shared care for all the conditions that need it - this isn't solveable by the council as it's an ICB policy.

We are a borough that has already seen some sexual violence by men who identify as men within gender neutral facilities (Ie the incident on the beer mile a couple of years back)

I would take the angle of not excluding trans people but ensuring the council provides accomodations / spaces for both women and people who are trans to ensure everyone is safe from predatory men.

We are lucky to have some fantastic trans people within our community who do a lot of work on keeping everyone in the community safe and who are against this proposal so I'm sure they will be quietly reaching out to the council as well

Social care - an elderly Muslim or orthodox Jewish woman has dementia. Her children request she has a female carer in line with their beliefs around religion and that women need same sex care. Can WF council guarantee any carer will be a woman ie provide a single sex service to women

And people who are trans and homeless are usually placed directly into hotel accomodation (this is pretty much all over London not just WF) and not into hostels.

Well that would just go to show how slippery she is wouldn't it. Let's see how she handles the yea but no but approach to the problem on her doorstep.

TBH Stella hates the Green Party based on her posts around local election time so she would probably pick up on this even though she shares the same beliefs as what is written.

You could always raise it with your MP. Oh no wait that would be Stella Creasey.

https://talk.walthamforest.gov.uk/using-council-buildings-to-meet-local-housing-needs-cedar-wood-house

Consultation closes on Monday but this is one of the new TA projects. The one that is right next to a school... To not make this single sex is madness but they've refused and refused to look at evidence including from women experiencing homelessness and young women experiencing homelessness to

There are no women's only hostels in WF and neither of the two new TA projects will be single sex for women and children either. The excuse given was that would legally mean boys over the age of 8 couldn't be housed there (this is complete bollocks).

Many of us have been told the council won't house victims of DV as that's what refuges are for... So much for the borough of sanctuary.

Sorry Ive not read the whole thread - if it’s like my council the real worry is social care… it’s the biggest part of the council budget and if this ruling does what I think then sex realists could be denied single sex care…. Urgh

Hostel placements are one of the areas where gender identity complicates things. It's pretty obvious that a trans-identifying woman can't be placed in a men's hostel, but will she accept a place in a women's hostel? So what do social services actually do? The answer is probably that this person will have to sleep in friends' accommodation, possibly bed hopping. She shouldn't be on the streets, and no hostel is well placed to take her.

The examples that come to my mind where sex is relevant would be personal care, and placement in supported housing or similar for adults with disabilities. I guess also homeless/hostel placements? And I think that if children over 12 (might be 10) of different sexes have to share a room that is classified as overcrowding.

Do they mean to apply this to all council run services - ie social care, children’s services, schools? The motion is extremely unclear.