Ed Davey says the EHRC code has failed in its objective and calls for post legislative scrutiny of the GRA & EA. Presumably to legally allow blokes in the ladies.

[SingleSexSpacesInSchools]

https://x.com/LibDems/status/2060771889295900821/photo/1

That's all right, I'm basking in the double praise for my post😁
I've been 'brewing' that argument for a long time - that disabled people only get 'reasonable adjustments' but transpeople get everything they want, everywhere, at any cost, no matter how disruptive, and no matter how unfavourable the consequences are for other people.

I instinctively bristle at the suggestion that 'the way forward is third [fourth] spaces', I've always thought 'No, the way forward is people using the toilets designated for their sex!'

I've always thought it unfair that the feasibility and affordability of providing specific spaces for transpeople has never been made an issue of.

And then recently I was reading up about disability discrimination, and had a 💡moment - it's OK to limit the adjustments made for people with disabilities on the grounds of reasonableness, but discriminatory to put any limit on adjustments for transgender people.

Good point. It will be odd icf they don't sign.

Just to explain what is going on again as there seems to be some confusion . This is no ordinary Early Day Motion.

It is effectively what is called a Fatal Prayer motion which is the only way for Parliament to potentially stop alterations to statutory instruments being enacted. I.E it is a way they can stop the EHCR code from being accepted. Remember achieving this will not change the law which says women exist and have single sex spaces. It just means there would be no guidance to explain the law.

However the issue is that getting the motion from here to a debate and vote relies on either the government deciding to allow it or the opposition pushing for it. Thus it is very rare for a Fatal prayer motion to actually be passed the last time in the Commons was in 1979.

Summary here:
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn02569/

So is it pointless. NO it is not. Right now 51 MPs 7.85% of the house have signed. If they get say get a quarter or third of MPs to sign then there will be increasing pressure to allow a debate. The government would not have to of course, but there would be calls for it. A Fatal Prayer motion was debated in Commons committee in 2025 over government plans to alter local government elections. So they can have effect if A LOT of MPs sign and support them.

The reverse is true of course. If they cannot get much more than this it will show the TA cause in this current Parliament is pretty sunk.

So should people write to their MP. Yes if MPs who are wavering get a lot of pro EHCR letters it will incline them to sit this motion out. Keep telling them how excellent the Supreme court judgement is and how important women's safety is. A lot of TAs will be writing to their MPs we need to do the same.

A biased perspective but a summary here:

National article - See the MPs backing bid to have UK equality watchdog's trans guidance scrapped

https://archive.is/Gbd7K

I think things are a bit confused, because this thread was originally about a letter written by Ed Davey.

But then bits got added about the Ministerial Statement made yesterday - see this thread. https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5537156-house-of-commons-this-afternoon-ministerial-statement-on-new-code-of-practice?page=1 where you can either watch the statement or read the text https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2026-06-01/debates/CE610C68-7093-454F-B897-AF008EE7E7A0/EqualityAct2010CodeOfPractice

Then in response to this some MPs have said the guidelines this statement is about should be withdrawn:

That the draft Code of Practice for Services, public functions and associations, a copy of which was laid before this House on 21 May, be disapproved.
See https://edm.parliament.uk/early-day-motion/65938

Which has its own thread here!
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5537362-house-of-communions-early-day-motion-tabled-draft-code-of-practice-on-services-public-functions-and-associations

So its whether you want to ask to your MP does s/he really think what Seema Malhotra outlined in the House of Commons should be withdrawn.

Sorry late at night but for clarity I hope, the outline relates to this! which we and the EHRC have waited months for!
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5532766-ehrc-code-of-practice-on-services-public-functions-and-associations-has-been-laid-here-is-the-code-itself