“We have a duty in law, in equality law. Women are recognised as a disadvantaged group. There are women who have earned hard-won rights, our mothers, ourselves, and it is important for those rights to be protected to the best of the law’s ability.
She insists, though, that changing the law would not necessarily infringe on the rights of trans women because they, as a group, are also explicitly protected under the Equalities Act.
For example, she says, trans women should not be forced to use men’s lavatories against their wishes. “Service providers will be clearer about the services they wish to offer,” she says. “I’m hoping that they will continue absolutely to offer trans-inclusive services, but also be clear that they can offer single-sex spaces.”
If that was the motivation, though, what about the charge that the EHRC under Falkner has become dragged into politics, and is effectively taking the side of the government in a culture wars debate where it should be seen to be neutral?
This was a claim made by Falkner’s predecessor, David Isaac, who had held the post from 2016 and had been chairman of the LGBT campaign group Stonewall from 2003 to 2012.
Ultimately, Falkner says, what the EHRC is trying to do is balance competing rights among groups who have defined protected characteristics under the law, whether that be race, gender, disability, sex or religion.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/baroness-falkner-ehrc-interview-5g3g505m5
IMO
> This is the interview that the BBC should have done
> Not mentioned in this article but her predecessor David Isaacs was / is Chair of Stonewall which shows that a Chair can influence policy as previous EHRC statements have not acknowledged women's sex based rights being erased.
> The article can be read in full by going to https://archive.ph and posting in the Times article link above.