Updated EHRC code to be published in May
The Minister for Women and Equalities, Bridget Phillipson, has made a statement to Parliament saying that she intends to lay the updated draft of the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s code of practice for services, public functions and associations before Parliament “as soon as practicable” after the local and devolved administration elections.
Then after 40 days, if neither house passes a resolution disapproving the draft, it will come into force.
The EHRC has admitted that it amended the guidance after the government provided it with “a narrow set of comments” on its previous draft.
Neither the minister nor the independent regulator is mandated to engage in this sort of delay and negotiation whereby the independent regulator edits its guidance to meet the preferences of the government.
Section 14(7) of the Equality Act 2006 says that before issuing a code the EHRC shall submit a draft to the Secretary of State, who shall either approve the draft and lay a copy before Parliament or give the EHRC written reasons why she does not approve it. The legal framework does not envisage this as a back-and-forth process of backroom negotiations between the government and the EHRC.
It is concerning that in her statement the Minister for Women and Equalities continues to focus on specialist service providers such as hospitals and women’s refuges and has still not made clear that ALL employers and service providers that offer single-sex or separate-sex facilities do so under the Equality Act, which recognises that men who have the protected characteristic of gender reassignment remain men, and do not have the right to access facilities provided for women and girls.
As our report One year later makes clear, the past year’s delay has caused serious harm to countless women. The statement that the government has “always supported the protection of single-sex spaces based on biological sex” is a slap in the face for women and girls who have faced harassment and hounding from jobs and services for calling for the law to be upheld.
Delaying laying the guidance till after local council and devolved administration elections is more unjustified procrastination.
The government has patted itself on the back, saying: “We are getting it right, showing leadership by implementing the clarity the Supreme Court ruling delivers.” Yet government departments up and down the country are still operating with unlawful policies that the previous head of the civil service refused to withdraw.
I’m wondering if this ‘delay’ exists because the Labour government are considering ways to actually change the law - to change the definition of sex. Given the Supreme Court clarified the existing law and meaning of sex (👀). Will the Labour government attempt to change the law. It wouldn’t surprise me. They hate women that much. Labour have woman problem. Their leader thinks some women have penises. We need them out of power.
I read the Sex Matters booklet and numerous accounts of what the government isn’t doing to protect women, but I have yet to see any guidelines on what can be done about it. Fingers crossed that some organization will address this with an action plan.