Law changes to strengthen women's rights by rewriting the Equality Act on the basis of biological sex instead of gender identity might not take place until next summer

[IwantToRetire]

The project to rewrite part of the Equality Act on the basis of biological sex rather than gender identity was proposed by equalities minister Kemi Badenoch in February.

The Equality and Human Rights Commission backed the idea in April, saying it would bring 'greater legal clarity' in eight different areas including allowing organisers to prevent transgender women from entering female-only spaces such as single-sex wards or sports teams.

But it has now emerged that the Cabinet Office has only recently advertised for a civil servant to work on the project – and specifies that it will not be completed until next July.

Whitehall job ad posted internally in August offered up to £75,000 for an official to take charge of the clarification of equality law.

It stated: 'The post is needed to lead a new team established within the Equality Hub at the Minister for Women and Equalities' request. One of the major deliverables is a complex legislative project that is due to be completed by July 2024.

'This is a role to consider whether and how legislative changes to the Equality Act 2010 could be made. This project is intended to be completed by end July 2024.'

Campaigners believe the change required to the law is only a simple tweak, however, and want it to be carried out urgently. They believe a piece of secondary legislation known as a statutory instrument – which would not have to be voted on by MPs or peers – would suffice. It could introduce a definition of women to the Equality Act, stating that it means those who were born female – and not those who were born male but legally changed sex by obtaining a Gender Recognition Certificate.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12494299/Law-changes-strengthen-womens-rights-rewriting-Equality-Act-basis-biological-sex-instead-gender-identity-not-place-summer.html

This was published a couple of days ago, and I did nto see or hear anything about it.

In the article it makes it sound like the Tories are committed to making this change, but I thought at the end of the Westminster Hall debate they just made some vague comment about having to look at it further.

Worrying that it will be an internal appointment given that civil servants have been Stonewalled.

I suspect like many of the articles in the DM and the DT and even TT this is another leak by a faction and / or to get public response so the Government can gauge level of interest, vote winner etc..

The same Baroness O'Cathain who campaigned against gay couples being allowed to have civil partnerships or to adopt children.

It may be depressing but hardly unusual in an intelligent person being astute in one area and completely misguided/wrong in others.

We have many of examples of those eg highly intelligent men who are uniformed, uncaring and/or obtuse about the impact of self ID on women including our political leaders.

Ffs, what do you want to do? Go through the world with a rubber stamp, check everyone and stamp 'impure, dehumaned' on the foreheads of every one that ever said anything that you personally don't agree with?!

You disagree with her on that. Fine. That does not mean you have to split her into the Evil camp in black and white world and dismiss anything she ever again says.

I'm bloody homosexual and I've got more tolerance than this, people are actually allowed opinions. They do not have to conform to someone's RightThink.

Of course she was allowed her opinion. And I am allowed the opinion that hers shows a warped set of values that damage the rights of minority groups.

And of course she didn’t just have an opinion. She used her (unelected) power to deny people like you (and me) the right to apply to adopt and to have any legal recognition of our relationships.

Those sorts of views render someone’s judgement massively undermined.

There is no provision in the EA2010 for it to be amended by statutory instrument. This legislation will not happen by the end of this parliament, and will not be introduced by Labour.

TRAs must be happy about Labour

I hope female Labour voters think it’s worth it for it to be killed dead

Listening to Rayner this morning they won’t be getting much more to make up for it

Providing an irrefutable argument for ensuring the return of a Tory government in two simple sentences.

What we have in common is treating the transgender minority as a big important political issue, from opposite perspectives.

For most people it's way, way down the list. In 2022, it was 16th on the list of issues which people think are important. Most people won't vote on these issues.

It does have the ability to hurt politician’s careers though

Even very successful ones who probably polled well

As Sturgeon found out

Having completed our inclusion policy training today, I’m reminded of the following quote because apparently it’s gender affirmation that’s one of the 9 protected characteristics under the EA2010. Moreover, reassignment actually means anyone who feels they have a different gender, or thinks about having a different gender or don’t think they have any gender or…

“When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’

’The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’

’The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master — that’s all.”

I cannot disagree with you. However, as Labour systematically removes every difference between themselves and the Tories on the issues that influence voters, this may climb up the list. Something to consider?

I think it’s wrong to assume that all civil servants are “stonewalled”