Keir Starmer Government urged to clarify definition of sex by the Tories

[IwantToRetire]

Shadow equalities minister Claire Coutinho has pressed the Government to clarify the definition of sex. Equalities minister Bridget Phillipson said it was “important that providers have clarity in this area”.

She added that providers “have the right to restrict access to service on the basis of biological sex” under the Equality Act 2010.

In the Commons on Wednesday, Coutinho said: “In the election the Conservative Party committed to clarifying the definition of sex in the Equality Act 2010 to protect women’s rights.

“At the end of this month For Women Scotland vs Scottish Ministers will be heard in the UK Supreme Court, this case will have far-reaching consequences for sex-based rights. So can the Government assure the House that it’s clear that the definition of sex in the Equality Act 2010 means biological sex?”

During women and equalities questions, Phillipson replied: “I won’t comment on ongoing cases, but what I can be clear to her about is that the Equality Act 2010 does set out that providers, for example, have the right to restrict access to service on the basis of biological sex.

“This Government is proud of our achievements in legislating for the Equality Act. We will make sure that providers can continue to support single-sex exemptions. And it is important that providers have clarity in this area, and I’ll be happy to work with her to make sure that is the case.”

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/keir-starmer-government-urged-clarify-34102096

Will that single-line amendment of the EA2010 or GRA fix the problem?

The protected characteristic of gender reassignment will still give trans people the entré to segregated spaces (they refuse to associate with their own sex, and are barred from opposite sex spaces, so they have no access to the service in question at all, making them worse off than 'cis' people of the same sex).

Also, LAPAs (legitimate and proportionate aims). It's common ground that a LAPA can justify exclusion even of someone with a GRC. But this is represented as an insuperably high barrier. Sex segregation has become something that is theoretically possible but doesn't happen in real life. Will changing sex in EA2010 to mean, sex at birth, fix this?

There are existing regulations about sex segregation. Regulations about prisons and schools, and facilities that employers must provide. They were drafted without knowledge of what was coming, so they don't define who the segregated groups are or specify how or whether segregation should be enforced. Because it all seemed so obvious at the time. Maybe those regulations need amending.

Or maybe their mere existence is evidence of LAPAs that exist, have already been enshrined in law, and are going unfulfilled.

Badenoch failed to get the support she needed, governments make difficult change all the time. She wasn’t backed by her own party. Why? Because she couldn’t influence her colleagues.

Please provide evidence for this!

What a ludicrous comment.

And if you engaged your brain has it not occured to you that getting the Shadow Minister for Women to ask the question she did, ie the point of this thread, is evidence that they aren't shying away from the issue.

And again as has to be said on threads over and over again, with simplistic, why didn't she just do it, I suggest you go and educate yourself about HoC processes.

It's common ground that a LAPA can justify exclusion even of someone with a GRC. But this is represented as an insuperably high barrier.

This isn't true. It is not a high barrier. The examples in the EA all refer to women support services.

The big hurdle is that TRAs have caputured the "social norm" and so gender neutral crept in to management decisions etc., and by women impacted by this as members of the public, they became the target of insults for being terfs or dinasours.

So in fact what is already the law is being impeded by false facts being shared not just by the media but politicians who play stupid word games about the word woman. It can only make you wonder on their mental competence that they have made themselves such willing acolytes for a minor belief cult.

Can you imagine what would happen if Labour presented in a quiet way a small rewording of the EA to clarify that the word sex in the act means biology?

They would be torn apart in public, not because the majority wouldn't support it, but because the media has been captured.

And in terms of due process, the problem is Labour isn't following through the political process in relation to the debate in response to the 2 petitions to the HoC re rewording the EA.

The conclusion of that meeting was that further work would be done on this, which KB was doing.

A change of Government shouldn't stop that process, because the petitions were to the HoC - not one political party.

So this is about the lack of willingness of Labour to fulfil the democratic process.

If Wes Streeting is capable of taking a decision now he has a position of power, that in some ways goes against what he said in opposition, then the current Minister for Women should have the integrity to do the same.

Oh, silly me! I forgot Labour conveniently made the position of Minister for Women some not very important job, divided between 2 MPs an arrangement that will make any issue focused on women even harder to process.

hmmmmm............ was this an unforseen consequence, or a carefully planned demotion of a powerful ministerial post to focus on women.

Some may say that, but I couldn't possibly comment.

I think she was saying that they agree it can theoretically be justified, but they argue the bar is very high in order to do so - so it's effectively none in practice.

Which is what I said.

It is a myth circualted not just by TRAs but all the MRAs in local councils that are closing women's refuges on the grounds that the women only concept isn't worthy of tax payer's money.

And as with the TRA misinformation, because the strength of the TRA movement is because it builds on the far wider more pervasive long established anti woman view of the world, held and practiced by MRAs.

Claire Coutinho keeping pressure up on Labour in latest letter to government.

Expect much more of this over the next few years.

Brilliant letter.
Thanks for sharing

That’s a great letter, thanks for sharing @fromorbit I might have missed it otherwise.

Here’s hoping Kemi and the Tory party keep up the pressure.

Yes good letter, and good to know that the Tories are keeping up the pressure.

And glad she raised the point about not only clarifying the meaning of the word sex, but also the need to undo the damage of all those who have exploited the situation to promote their gender identity politics.