6 London councils to ignore EHRC guidance

Back in the 80s and 90s, if councillors did something illegal that ended up costing the council a lot of money, they could be surcharged to try to claw some of it back. Sadly that no longer applies, as it can help focus the mind remarkably.

But that's entirely the council's fault. I really think the only way these people will change is if they're forced to. Otherwise, are we just going to let them get away with it?

Separately this was making me wonder - why do we even elect local councillors when their role is more similar to the civil service than to that of an MP? They don't really have any law-making decision power, they just administrate local services. Surely this role is better suited to qualified professionals and continuity of provision, rather than short/medium-term elected people with political motivations.

We just want pothole free roads, reliable transport, regular bin collections... why is this even election-based?

We don't vote for our water or gas providers, why do we vote for the people in charge of the bins?

Writing to object means they can't say no complaints have been made. Everyone in those areas who object needs to complain. Trans rights activists have very loud voices.

I'm not trying to be provocative, I just honestly don't understand it.

It's like Burnham's obsession with devolution. Fwiw I agree with a fair bit that Burnham has said lately. But I don't understand why we should give more and more control to separate councils, which is the opposite principle to the economy of scale. And they are all going to be short-termist as they have election cycles, compared to the civil service which has permanent positions.

I just don't understand the reasoning behind it (and I'd like to)

Yes I think i will write to them but I have little hope that it will make a difference. They just dismiss people who object as bigots.

Yes! It feels a very outdated system in many way. Local democracy doesn't matter as much as effective social care or a functioning pot hole repair service. Tier 1 local authorities are responsible for too many things and have too big an impact on ppls lives to let so many ppl without a clue have do much power. The amount of times I've seen local council officers patiently explain what is legally allowed and what isn't only to get a big grand standing response in reply, ignoring the legalities.

I also think councillors should be apolitical. Too many cllrs elected just because they are a member of a certain party and the ward would elect a donkey if it wore the right rosette!

This system sounds ideal.

https://x.com/i/status/2085281092366475399

Some useful commentary from Ellie Cumbo (who used to be a Southwark councillor)

Write to them and be sure to copy in everyone else you can think of. I'd go for local MP, police commissioner and local newspaper. Those people won't have to act, but we need to make it as hard as possible for the council to pretend they never received the correspondence.

It is a bit of an odd one this. Whilst local councillors can pass motions and order the Council employees to do xyz. The CEO and the senior management team have to take legal advice and if found that xyz is unlawful can refuse to implement xyz.

If the CEO follows xyz then he and his employees will be in the firing line.

Did the CEO’s authorise this stupid letter.

Very strange.

"Bristol city council said services could admit people according to their gender identity, meaning trans women could be allowed into women’s services. However, it said any service operating in that way must not be described as female-only and should instead be labelled “single-gender” or “trans-inclusive”"

So a round about way of saying that all their facilities are now mixed sex.

Have they done an impact assessment? Do they think all their facilities meet standards of the relevant building code? If they have done this and come to the conclusion that it is all legal, why not just call them mixed sex?

My most immediate question would be whether their employees have facilities that comply with H&S standards.

And then I would be wondering which other laws they are breaking.

In the actual statements by each of these councils is a grudging admission they'll have to comply with the law.

So they are cynically misleading their trans constituents?

Public sector employees who make these decisions and bring legal proceedings on their employers' heads should be made to shoulder the costs of the fines. They know full well they are breaking the law but are also operating in the knowledge that it's the taxpayer who will pick up the legal bill and fine. It's disgusting.

Has anyone found the actual 'open letter'? All I'm seeing are articles and statements about the letter.

I think yetanotherusernameagain shared it at 07.54 if you check that link

Ah that wasn't the full letter.

This is:

https://www.walthamforest.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2026-08/Joint%20letter%20to%20Minister%20for%20Women%20and%20Equalities%2005.08.26.pdf

That's Lewisham Council's news article about the letter. All the councils seem to have published the same. It has lots of quotes from the letter but no link to the letter itself.

Thank you!

Having read the full text of the letter I’m not sure Ellie Cumbo is right. I don’t think the letter does contain any admission that the law will have to be observed by the six councils (assuming the letter actually reflects the views of the various majority groups on each council).

I do agree with her that it’s likely to be posturing. But these posers are shit-for-brains activist London councillors after all.

Let's be clear. The Times headline is misleading. It is not the guidance they are ignoring, it is the LAW. Law that has been in place for many years and has not changed,

Their request:

1. Confirm that the EHRC Code of Practice cannot be interpreted to exclude Trans+people from services and must be used to create inclusive services;
2. Introduce legislation which protects the rights of Trans+ people, ensuring that they are able to participate fully in public life and access services safely, with privacy, and with dignity;
3. Create an equalities framework that protects trans people’s safety, dignity and humanity.

I think this is all already covered by the Equality Act and the Guidance, at least so far as it relates to people with the PC of Gender Reassignment. The only gripe the council seems to have is that the legislation also protects sex based rights.

However, as an aside it's the concept of 'Trans+' that has led as to where we are now, because it makes the concept of 'trans' meaningless.

I certainly wouldn't trust these people to manage my bin collections.

The Scottish government have been forced to change their policy. This disrespect for the rule of law can’t just be allowed to stand.

The actual letter confirms two things.

It is just hot air

The signatories are very, very stupid.

Exactly.