Latest news with #transInclusion
Times
30-06-2025
- Politics
- Times
Church flouted law by letting trans woman use girls' toilet
The Church of Scotland flouted the law on single-sex spaces by wrongly insisting that biological men could still share female lavatories with girls, it has emerged. A mother raised concerns that at least one man from an LGBT club was using female facilities at a church-run community centre in Cupar, Fife, where her 11-year-old daughter attended a drama class. She was told by the church that it was 'lawful and often appropriate' for 'women-only spaces to include trans women', despite the Supreme Court ruling in April. The advice, in correspondence seen by The Times, was issued after an intervention by the Church of Scotland's safeguarding and legal departments, despite the local minister, the Rev Jeff Martin, initially backing the mother and saying her concerns would be dealt with. The church has claimed that its trans-inclusive stance was based on the advice of 'legal experts' such as the activist group Stonewall and the Good Law Project run by the barrister Jolyon Maugham, which is seeking to overturn the Supreme Court ruling. On Monday night the Church of Scotland admitted that its advice to the parent was incorrect and it should not have relied on positions taken by partisan groups. It said it now 'supported the right' of women and girls to access single-sex spaces, and suggested trans people should be provided with gender-neutral facilities. The confusion led to new calls for the Scottish government to take a lead over the issue instead of insisting its policies cannot be changed until the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) issues formal advice later this year. Bodies that refuse to implement the Supreme Court ruling have been warned that they face legal action. The Scottish government is facing separate threats of being sued again by For Women Scotland, which defeated ministers in the Supreme Court, and Sex Matters. Sir Keir Starmer, the prime minister, has told hospitals and government departments they must implement the ruling 'as soon as possible' after some bodies south of the border were accused of deliberate delays. The correspondence obtained by The Times, and the clarification issued on Monday, show the Kirk has taken three different positions on the issue of single-sex spaces within a matter of weeks. Every organisation in Britain was told to revisit their equalities policies after the Supreme Court ruled that a woman was defined by biological sex under equalities law, but there is widespread confusion about the implications. • Gender-neutral lavatories banned in new-build restaurants and offices Bodies such as the Scottish parliament have moved quickly to ban trans women from female spaces, while some schools in Scotland have moved to get rid of gender-neutral toilets. However, the Scottish government has insisted it must wait until the EHRC issues its formal advice, despite the regulator saying this is not necessary — meaning some policies remain in place that critics claim are clearly unlawful. A EHRC consultation on the formal guidance was due to close on Monday. A legal expert, whose work was cited in the Supreme Court judgment, said the Church of Scotland's earlier stance 'completely misstates the law' and claimed the saga exposed the pitfalls of relying on activist groups for advice. Kelly, the mother of the 11-year-old, who did not want her surname published, went to pick up her daughter from a drama class at the Old Parish Centre in May. She encountered a man from an LGBT club, which was using the building, in the female lavatory. She said she 'froze' and later raised her concerns with Martin, the church minister. He was initially supportive and pledged to deal with the matter, but in a second email last week he said that advice from the church's central office meant he had to 'rescind' his first mail. It had been made clear to him that 'a trans woman's use of the women's toilet aligns with her gender identity, and this is lawful and consistent with current best practice'. Kelly said she was 'gobsmacked' to see that 'men's feelings are taking priority over young girls'. The EHRC confirmed that access to single-sex facilities should be based on biological sex. The Supreme Court stated in April that, for the purposes of UK equalities law, a biological man cannot become legally female. LGBT activist groups, many of which previously wrongly suggested organisations had a legal obligation to allow access to single-sex spaces on the basis of gender self-identification, have been accused of spreading misinformation about the ruling. • Toilet politics and death threats: why transgender judge Victoria McCloud quit Michael Foran, a Glasgow University expert in equalities law, who will soon join the University of Oxford to become associate professor of law, said the Church of SCotland's earlier response to the parent, which also claimed it could not put in place a 'blanket policy' of excluding trans women from female toilets, 'completely misstates the law'. He said: 'It is contradicted by the express wording of the Supreme Court in its judgment in FWS [For Women Scotland] and by the decades of law on direct discrimination. 'Any service provider operating a service on the basis of self-identification and not biological sex is exposed to significant risk of liability.' Foran added: 'This response demonstrates the importance of seeking specialist legal advice. Duty bearers under the Equality Act should not rely on lobby groups for their legal advice.' Trina Budge, a director of For Women Scotland, said she was 'quite astonished' to see 'just how the church has got the law so wrong' in its email to Kelly. She said: 'We are delighted and relieved that the church has reconsidered its position and taken the time to understand the Supreme Court ruling. 'Many organisations have been misled on the law for a very long time by activist groups and it shows exactly why the Scottish government must stop prevaricating and take the lead on sorting out the confusion that has been allowed to take hold.' The Church of Scotland expressed 'regret' that the advice it issued to the parent was 'not correct' or in alignment with EHRC advice. It said: 'The church has been considering the implications of that decision and has not yet issued formal guidance on the issue for congregations, bearing in mind that the EHRC has stated that it was aiming to provide an updated code of practice on services and public functions by the end of June. 'We do not consider that it is appropriate for the church to rely on advice provided by Stonewall and the Good Law Project and we should not have referred to their views on this question. 'We support the right of women and girls to access single-sex spaces and the right of trans women and trans men to access gender-neutral spaces, so that trans people are not put in a position where there are no facilities for them to use.'
Yahoo
26-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Quakers accused of ‘destroying' reputation with trans-inclusive lavatories
Quakers have been accused of 'destroying' their reputation as pioneers on women's rights by refusing to provide separate toilets for females. Quakers in Britain said its toilets would remain 'trans inclusive' despite the ruling by the Supreme Court that the word 'sex' in the Equality Act refers to biological sex and not gender identity. It said it was not desirable to monitor who uses its facilities, adding: 'We cannot guarantee any shared space as exclusive for one group of people.' Quakers have gained a reputation for their progressive attitude towards women, having allowed them to preach as early as the 17th century. But Helen Joyce, the director of advocacy at Sex Matters, a women's rights group, said they appeared to have abandoned that legacy by adopting 'textbook trans activism'. 'Early Quakers were famously supportive of women's rights – they would surely be shocked and ashamed if they could see the destruction of that proud legacy,' she said. Last month's Supreme Court ruled that transgender women are not legally women, and clarified that the word 'sex' in the Equality Act means biological sex and not gender identity. The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) then put out interim guidance to organisations, underlining that in places such as hospitals, shops and restaurants, 'trans women (biological men) should not be permitted to use the women's facilities'. A growing number of public bodies have changed their guidance in light of the judgment. The Football Association has said trans women could be banned from women's sport. But other organisations, including the Houses of Parliament, are awaiting final guidance from the EHRC. The statement from Quakers in Britain dismissed the EHRC's interim guidance, which it said 'goes beyond the scope and actual statements' in the Supreme Court ruling. Paul Parker, the recording clerk, said: 'This is already contested and subject to legal challenge.' He said the faith group would 'welcome and affirm trans and non-binary people in Quaker spaces', adding: 'We must respect the dignity of each person to live with integrity, informed by the truth of their lived experience'. Like Stonewall, Mr Parker said the Supreme Court judgement did not have 'the force of law'. 'Whilst the EHRC has recently issued guidance, this is currently only interim guidance. It is non-statutory and therefore does not have the force of law,' the document states. 'We see the Equality Act itself as our primary legal guide when making decisions. 'It is not possible or desirable to monitor who uses our facilities and therefore cannot guarantee any shared space as exclusive for one group of people. We will not label something as a single-sex space if we cannot truthfully guarantee that it will be single-sex.' The minutes of the meeting read: 'The rights and inclusion of people belonging to our communities and using our buildings are not, and should not be, just about toilets. We will continue to work to make our corner of the commonwealth of heaven on Earth a more welcoming and accessible place. This is what love requires of us.' Quakers in Britain also pointed out that at its main building, French House in London, all public facilities were 'trans inclusive'. A spokesman said: 'Toilets labelled with a 'female' sign are intended for cis women, trans women, and non-binary and intersex people for whom this toilet is best aligned with their lived experience. 'Toilets labelled with a 'male' sign are intended for cis men, trans men, and non-binary and intersex people for whom this toilet is best aligned with their lived experience.' Ms Joyce said: 'British Quakers' announcement that it will continue to allow trans-identifying men to use female facilities is textbook trans activism. It is also in breach of the law. The organisation would be wise to consult legal expertise without delay. 'It is not 'inclusive' to seek a way around labelling toilets and changing rooms as male and female in order to avoid having to monitor whether people comply with common-sense rules that are there to protect everyone. It places the desires of those who seek to transgress boundaries over the needs of the most vulnerable. 'This is an upside-down vision of equality, integrity and truth. By defying the UK's highest court and removing protections for women and girls, Quakers are courting legal risk and demonstrating a lack of care and responsibility, in the pursuit of a fashionable dogma.' A spokesman for Quakers in Britain said: 'Our facilities are legally compliant. Quakers in Britain welcome and affirm trans and non-binary people in all Quaker spaces. Our values of equality and integrity guide every decision we make. 'No trans, non-binary, or intersex Quaker, staff member, or service user will be asked to disclose or prove aspects of their identity in ways that are not asked of cisgender people. We do not seek to monitor who uses our facilities, nor do we believe it is possible or desirable to do so. 'We have self-contained facilities, which function as single sex spaces, available for all our building users. We are committed to taking robust and proactive steps to ensure that all our spaces remain safe, inclusive, and free from harassment or inappropriate behaviour.'
Daily Mail
12-05-2025
- Health
- Daily Mail
Taxpayers face huge compensation bill for women denied single sex changing rooms
Taxpayers face a massive bill to compensate female public sector workers over the failure to provide single-sex toilets and changing rooms, it was warned yesterday. The NHS and a host of other organisations are at risk of demands for thousands of pounds to settle harassment claims by women who fell foul of unlawful 'trans inclusion' policies. It comes after the Supreme Court stated last month that the legal definition of a woman is based solely on biological sex rather than gender choices in a major victory for feminist campaigners. But there are now warnings that female employees will be able to launch legal challenges – arguing that having to share facilities with trans women amounts to harassment. Last night Scottish Tory equalities spokesman Tess White said: 'The Supreme Court ruling didn't rewrite the law, it simply reinforced what we already knew – biological women have a legal right to access single-sex spaces. 'This isn't hard to understand, it's basic common sense. Instead of upholding the law, John Swinney is still pandering to gender extremists and leaving the door open to more costly lawsuits that the taxpayer will pay for. 'Enough is enough – he must urgently issue a clear public sector directive requiring organisations to uphold the law.' Naomi Cunningham, the barrister representing nurse Sandie Peggie in her employment tribunal case against NHS Fife, told the Mail: 'The Supreme Court ruling will be seismic in its effect and one of the potential consequences is that organisations which have pursued 'trans inclusive' policies could face harassment claims. 'Those public sector bodies such as the NHS – and private companies which have policies allowing trans women to use female toilets and threaten women with disciplinary action if they complain – for example, could be seen to have created policies designed to intimidate their entire female workforce. 'If employers were able to demonstrate that they were changing their policies as a result of the Supreme Court ruling, it may act as a mitigation – but it wouldn't get them off the hook. 'The Supreme Court ruling did not change the law – it revealed the law as it always was, and as it always should have been interpreted. An employee has three months to launch a tribunal claim and could do so on the basis of harassment due to trans inclusion policies which they believe discriminated against them.' There were also concerns last night that some public liability or employer insurance policies could be invalidated. For example, the insurance policy for a football club may no longer cover a female footballer who is injured in a tackle by a trans woman – a biological male. Ms Cunningham said 'as a matter of great urgency', organisations should check their policies to ensure full compliance. A Scottish Government spokesman said: 'Following publication of the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) interim update [following the Supreme Court ruling], ministers have written to the EHRC to ask them to confirm that they agree that no public body, service provider or other association should issue specific guidance before the EHRC code of practice and guidance is finalised. 'As the EHRC is the enforcer and regulator of the Equality Act, we expect all organisations to consider its revised code of practice and guidance when published to ensure there is a consistent and clear understanding of the correct application of the law for all involved in this complex area.'
