UK (Parliament Politics Magazine) – Children’s Minister Josh MacAlister warns EHRC trans guidance poses risks, urging careful review to prevent policing issues in public spaces.
As reported by The Independent, the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s guidance on transgender rights has been slammed as a “misogynist’s charter” after concerns emerged that access to single-sex spaces could be determined by appearance.
Ministers received the document three months ago, but it has not been published, with the government is facing pressure to explain the delay.
How could EHRC Guidance affect trans access to single-sex spaces?
According to a leaked document seen by The Times, the EHRC guidance may allow transgender people to be excluded from single-sex spaces based on their appearance.
The new guidance could allow facilities such as hospital wards to question transgender women’s use of single-sex services based on appearance, behaviour, or concerns raised by others.
The guidance was revised following the Supreme Court ruling in April under the Equality Act, which determined that trans women are not legally recognised as women.
Women and Equalities Minister Bridget Phillipson, Josh MacAlister’s boss at the Department for Education, received the document on 4 September.
Commenting on the reports, Trans+ Solidarity Alliance founder Jude Guaitamacchi said,
“These leaks reveal that not only does the EHRC’s proposed code of practice seek to require trans exclusion, it instructs service providers to police this based on appearance and gender stereotypes.”
They added,
“This is a misogynist’s charter, plain and simple, and the government must reject it.”
How did Josh MacAlister describe the impact of the EHRC draft guidance?
Children’s Minister Josh MacAlister acknowledged “the problem isn’t going to go away” as the government reviews guidance from the equalities watchdog.
He said,
“These are massive issues and I think that the public now looking at the draft guidance from the EHRC will recognise that when you drill down into examples of how this might be applied, it has big implications for individuals, it has big implications for businesses and public services.”
Mr MacAlister rejected the claim that the government was refusing to publish the guidance in the hope that the problem would go away.
He added,
“It would be really bad politics, wouldn’t it, because the problem isn’t going to go away. These are live issues and the reason why there’s a big political debate about this is because it’s a really hard issue to resolve between lots of different, competing views.”
The children’s minister said,
“I just ask people to imagine small corridors where you’ve got a set-up around toilets that’s pretty restricted and you’ve got – whether it’s a restaurant or a school or a gym – not that much space to play with.”
Mr MacAlister added,
“The guidance, as it’s written, has implications for both how physical buildings are set up, but also how staff in those settings would need to determine and judge even whether somebody might look like a woman. And so we want to avoid being in a position where toilets are being policed by people.”
He justified the delay in releasing the guidance, saying the time for transgender issues is “very little in the grand scheme of things.”
The children minister added,
“So, we’re doing this as fast as we can and there’s no deadline that we’re putting on it. We want to get it right, and if we don’t get it right it does risk putting this back into the courts and providing even greater uncertainty for people. So, we’re going to take our time to get it right.”
What did Bridget Phillipson say about the EHRC guidance?
Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson said she would review the guidance “thoroughly and carefully.”
She stated,
“I have responsibilities to make sure that’s done properly and we’re taking the time to get this right.”
The equalities minister added,
“This is an important area and we want to make sure that women have access to a single-sex provision – that’s incredibly important for domestic violence services, rape crisis centres, so that women are able to heal from the trauma they’ve experienced. But of course, trans people should be treated with dignity and respect.”
What did the Supreme Court rule about trans women under the Equality Act?
In a detailed 88-page ruling, Lord Hodge, with Lords Reed, Lloyd-Jones, and Lady Rose and Simler, said that while the Equality Act does not use the term “biological,” the words “man” and “woman” align with biological characteristics.
According to the ruling, transgender people continue to be protected under the act; however, “gender reassignment and sex are separate grounds for discrimination and inequality.”
The group Labour for Trans Rights called the Supreme Court decision “hugely disappointing,” saying it was influenced by lobbying from a well-funded anti-trans network.
It said,
“Labour must not follow the example of Donald Trump, and must instead protect the Equality Act, one of Labour’s proudest pieces of legislation, and its legal protections for trans people.”
Tory leader Kemi Badenoch used the ruling to criticise Prime Minister Keir Starmer, declaring, “The era of Keir Starmer telling us women can have penises has come to an end.”
She added,
“Saying ‘trans women are women’ was never true in fact, and now isn’t true in law either. This is a victory for all of the women who faced personal abuse or lost their jobs for stating the obvious. Women are women and men are men: you cannot change your biological sex.”
What is the UK’s Equality Act 2010?
The UK’s Equality Act 2010 protects people from discrimination based on nine protected characteristics: age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex, and sexual orientation.
The Act unifies anti-discrimination laws, boosting protection in work, education, services, and public life across the UK. It requires public bodies to promote equality, tackle discrimination, and ensure equal opportunities, including specific mandated duties.