Liz v Rishi

[2Rebecca]

This has got surprisingly complex. I was sure I was team Liz for her work as women's officer in rolling back Mordaunt's anti woman nonsense. Now Mordaunt and even Sue Pascoe ( Tory transwoman who transitioned in Sue's 50s after being married with kids) are positive about Liz and I wonder what sort of nonsense she has agreed to to attract them.

Liz wasn't being asked to direct to a new legislation that doesn’t exist yet, she was for her support in laying the revised Statutory code based on the new guidance before Parliament, as per her role in the Equality Act.

"The process for amending the Statutory Codes of Practice is set out in the Equality Act 2006. The EHRC must publish and consult on its draft amendment before submitting the final version to the Secretary of State to be laid before Parliament. The Secretary of State can approve or refuse the amendment at that point, by giving written reasons. (Equality Act 2006 S. 14 (6))."

So this is nothing about what I "want to see written", it's about Liz being contradictory in her public and private positions, and refusing to allow clarity from the EHRC on the provision of single-sex services, which has been a particularly contentious thorn in the sex and gender debate.

The EHRC is meant to be an Independent Body, and even the Government is subject to the existing law of the land. Guidance issued by EHRC should be grounded in statute and case law, and not influenced by political expediency or pressure from interest groups/ Government position?

@achillestoes Essentially Liz Truss is going round in hustings claiming she wants to strengthen legal protections regarding female single sex provision, but the minute she was given an opportunity to actually do so in February, she declined. That's a huge red flag, and is what's missing from any automatic assumption that Liz is better than Rishi on Women's Rights.

Ok I admit I’m not following you, but actually would like to know what you think the correct response should have been

Granted you may not answer but still

I get you are concerned about it but if you say what it is that’s a better response I can see where she got it wrong

Or are you saying the response is fine it’s something outside that that concerns you

@MarshaBradyo I am saying Liz Truss response was wrong as it suggested Truss in her role as Secretary of State for Women and Equalities, was going to refuse to support the amendment to the EHRC Code of Practice on Services, Public Functions and Associations, producing updated guidance on provision single-sex services, even though that guidance was grounded in a correct interpretation of the law, and indeed appeared to support Liz Truss own previous public stance on this?
"First of all, the protection of single-sex spaces, which is extremely important." Liz Truss, April 2020

A better response would have been write back to Kishwer, supporting the amendment, given that it is grounded in Statute, and especially given many are concerned the 2010 Equality Act is too vague organisations are concerned the 2010 Equality Act is too vague on the circumstances in which trans people can legally be excluded from women-only facilities, such as hospital wards, rape crisis centres, etc.

Organisations have been worried they will face legal action if they attempt to retain women-only facilities or groups, so she could have mentioned that in her response and welcomed the EHRC clear guidance which would have provided reassurance?
She actually did this in June 2022 (publicly) "The Equality Act 2010 recognises this and allows for the restriction of single-sex spaces on the basis of biological sex. The law is clear, it is on their side and we will defend it."

She could also have used the opportunity to re-emphasize her public record stance on single sex provision:
"I am very keen that we protect single-sex spaces and vulnerable women, and that we do not rush into reform before we have had full, proper discussion", Liz Truss, October 2019

Again, how is Liz Truss squaring that with her PRIVATE comments to Kishwer in Feb 2022:
"The Government has NO INTEREST in changing the current situation where transgender people are able to use facilities of their chosen gender."