Swinney: Scots public bodies 'should wait for guidance' before single sex space change
Public bodies should wait for full guidance from the UK's equality watchdog before making changes to policy on single sex spaces, Scotland's First Minister has said. The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) issued interim guidance on Friday in the wake of the Supreme Court's ruling that sex in the Equality Act refers to biological sex. The body is expected to provide full guidance in the coming months on the implication of the ruling, but its release on Friday said trans women (biological men) should not be permitted to use women's facilities in areas such as hospitals, shops and restaurants. But speaking at the STUC Congress in Dundee , John Swinney said public bodies should wait until the full guidance is issued by the EHCR before implementing changes. "Public bodies have got to be mindful of the legal framework in which they operate and they've got to take into account the formal guidance that comes from the EHRC , which has been subject to consultation and ministerial approval and that's essentially what we wait for," he said. " I think organisations want to have legal certainty and they can only get legal certainty from the formal guidance that comes from the EHRC." Mr Swinney's comments come as he - along with his predecessor Nicola Sturgeon and Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer - was urged to apologise by one of his own MSPs. Speaking on BBC Radio Scotland on Monday morning, Michelle Thomson said: "In reality, let's be clear: Keir Starmer should also be apologising, Nicola Sturgeon should also be apologising because people expect government to make clear policies that can be translated into law, and this has been quite a mess for some time, and has only been cleared up as a result of the ruling by the Supreme Court." Asked to respond to her comments, the First Minister said he had addressed calls for him to apologise last week. The ruling has come in for criticism from some, with Green MSP Maggie Chapman hitting out at the Supreme Court, accusing judges of "bigotry, prejudice and hatred". Ms Chapman faces a vote on Tuesday on Holyrood's Equalities and Human Rights Committee - on which she is the deputy convener - in an effort by the Scottish Tories to oust her. Asked how the three SNP MSPs on the committee will vote on the issue, the First Minister said he was not aware, adding: "It would be wrong for me to intervene in the work of a committee by instructing them to do anything."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Powys County Times
an hour ago
- Powys County Times
UN urges UK to negotiate new Chagos deal that allows islanders to return
Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer faces calls to suspend his deal handing the Chagos Islands back to Mauritius after UN experts criticised its treatment of the Chagossian people. The deal, agreed last month after long-running negotiations, returns sovereignty of the islands to Mauritius, but will see the UK lease back a military base on Diego Garcia, the largest of the islands. But a panel of experts appointed by the UN Human Rights Council said retaining the base and continuing to bar Chagossians from Diego Garcia 'appears to be at variance with the Chagossians' right to return'. The Chagossians were expelled from the islands between 1965 and 1973 to make way for the joint UK-US base and have not been allowed to return. Although the UK-Mauritius deal includes a £40 million trust fund for the benefit of the Chagossians, the UN experts expressed concern that this would not provide an 'effective remedy' for the islanders. They also criticised an apparent lack of consultation of the islanders prior to the deal, saying: 'We are gravely concerned about the lack of meaningful participation of Chagossians in processes that have led to the agreement.' The experts added: 'In light of these significant concerns, we call for the ratification of the agreement to be suspended and for a new agreement to be negotiated that fully guarantees the rights of the Chagossian people to return to all islands of the Chagos Archipelago, including Diego Garcia.' Conservative shadow foreign secretary Dame Priti Patel urged the Government to 'do the right thing (and) stop this'. She said: 'We have been warning from the start that this deal is bad for British taxpayers and bad for the Chagossian people. 'Now even the United Nations is saying the very same. 'Labour has completely ignored this community from the get-go, and failed to consult with them at every step of the way. 'It is why I have introduced a Bill in Parliament that would block the (agreement) and force the Government to speak to the people at the heart of their surrender plans.' The deal follows a 2019 advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice saying the islands should be handed over to Mauritius. As well as the fund for Chagossians, the UK has agreed to pay at least £120 million a year for 99 years in order to lease back the Diego Garcia base – a total cost of at least £13 billion in cash terms. The deal also includes provisions preventing development on the rest of the archipelago without the UK's consent, which the Government has argued will prevent countries such as China setting up their own facilities. The agreement has also been backed by the United States.
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Montana Supreme Court declares 2021 abortion restrictions unconstitutional
Montana 's Supreme Court upheld a lower court ruling that struck down as unconstitutional several laws restricting abortion access, including a ban beyond 20 weeks of gestation. The measures approved by Republican lawmakers in 2021 had been blocked since a judge issued a preliminary injunction against them that year. While the case was pending, voters passed an initiative that enshrined the right to abortions in the Montana Constitution. Justices said in Monday's ruling that the state constitution included a 'right to be left alone" and have access to abortions. They said that right was not affected by a 2022 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that overturned Roe v. Wade and ended a half-century of nationwide abortion rights. The Montana laws also included a prohibition against telehealth prescriptions of abortion medication, a 24-hour waiting period after giving informed consent, and a requirement for providers to give patients the option of viewing an ultrasound or listening to the fetal heart tone. Planned Parenthood of Montana challenged the measures. Justices cited a 1999 Montana Supreme Court ruling that said the state constitution's right to privacy includes a woman's right to obtain an abortion before the fetus is viable from the provider of her choice. The state argued that the 1999 ruling was wrongly decided and has tried unsuccessfully on several occasions to get the Montana Supreme Court to overturn it. The Legislature in 2023 passed another slate of bills seeking to limit abortion access. Last year's initiative to make abortion a constitutional right in the state passed with backing from 58% of voters. An anti-abortion group called the Montana Family Foundation on Monday filed a lawsuit challenging the voter-approved initiative. The group claims voters who registered on Election Day were denied the chance to fully review the initiative because the ballot included only a summary. The full text was in a pamphlet mailed to registered voters.
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
Constance defends Police Scotland sex and gender policy
Last weekend, in The Herald on Sunday, a senior Police Scotland source accused the force of creating a 'culture of fear', where staff felt unable to raise concerns about how to record the sex of transgender suspects. READ MORE: The whistleblower claimed that officers were being instructed to search and record individuals 'as they present', even though no formal policy to that effect appeared to exist. She warned this could result in rapes committed by men being recorded as having been carried out by women — a scenario she described as 'unbelievable' and deeply traumatic for victims. On Tuesday, Scottish Labour MSP Pauline McNeill raised The Herald on Sunday's report in Holyrood, saying there was 'clear confusion' in the force due to the lack of official guidance. 'Many staff say they have to record someone — and indeed search them — based on how they present, even if that is the moment of arrest,' she said. 'It appears there is no official guidance, so staff are left to navigate sensitive and legally significant decisions without it.' She asked the Cabinet Secretary whether she was not 'concerned about the apparent lack of clarity being experienced by officers on the front line about how to record the sex and gender of suspected serious sexual offenders.' Ms Constance said: 'I do believe that there currently is clarity.' She also pointed to the comment given to The Herald on Sunday by the force, which said the whistleblower's account was 'inaccurate and misleading.' Ms McNeill said the force had offered contradictory explanations. While Chief Constable Jo Farrell told the Scottish Police Authority in September last year there was a clear approach, she said in a letter to her and in press reports, they had 'indicated since then that there is no set policy on how to record sex and gender of individuals.' The force is reviewing how it records sex and gender, and the Justice Secretary said this would take full account of the UK Supreme Court's landmark ruling on the definition of 'sex' in the Equality Act — which confirmed it means biological sex. Ms McNeill urged the Cabinet Secretary to engage directly with the force: 'Surely she must have a discussion now with Police Scotland about how they are recording sex when it comes to sexual crime, and that there is clarity for police officers on the front line?' Ms Constance replied that the Chief Constable had already given clear public assurances, and that Police Scotland would also consider forthcoming guidance from the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), which is currently under review. Tess White, the Conservative MSP for North East Scotland, accused Police Scotland of 'kicking the can down the road.' 'The force provided assurances to the Scottish Police Authority that the timeline for review does not preclude any immediate improvements identified and required to internal practice or policy, and that is in stark contrast with the meeting the Cabinet Secretary herself held with the Chief Constable on 30 April in which she emphasised that Police Scotland must await EHRC guidance on the Supreme Court ruling. 'Will her government now get off the fence and finally issue an urgent directive to public bodies to comply with the law and put an end to this mess?' Ms Constance said ministers were already taking action by working to ensure public services would be in a 'state of readiness' to respond to the EHRC guidance when it is finalised. READ MORE Speaking after the debate, Ms McNeill said she found the minister's answer 'disappointing.' 'The Government is responsible for this confusion — it is too important for them to leave to another review. If they support my view on data that the sex of the offender should be recorded then they should act to clear up the confusion.' Fraser Hudghton, from the Free Speech Union, said: 'The Justice Secretary's response in Parliament does not cut it. She is either being misinformed by the leadership at Police Scotland who have lost all control, or she is playing fast and loose with the facts. 'We know from serving officers and staff that police leadership are in thrall to 'woke' policies that originated from the SNP Government, regardless of what that means for data collection or the effective prosecution of criminals. It has to stop.' A spokesperson for Police Scotland previously told The Herald on Sunday: 'It is inaccurate and misleading to suggest a male accused of rape would be recorded as a woman. It is inaccurate and misleading to suggest female officers and members of staff are coerced into carrying out intimate searches on male prisoners.'
