Michelle O'Neill warns against ‘knee-jerk' reactions to Supreme Court ruling on gender
First Minister Michelle O'Neill has warned against 'knee jerk' reactions to the Supreme Court ruling on gender, as she called for a uniform response across the Stormont Executive.
She was commenting after DUP Education Minister Paul Givan instructed his officials to ensure that all Northern Ireland schools comply with the landmark ruling.
The Sinn Féin vice president said it was 'unfortunate' that move had come ahead of ministers receiving guidance on the court decision from the Northern Ireland Equality Commission.
Ms O'Neill said it was important ministers acted in a 'uniform' way when responding to the ruling.
'I absolutely do believe that we need to be uniform and across the board,' she said. 'Let's make it understandable for everybody.
'The Supreme Court has made its ruling. It's now for the Equality Commission to provide us with guidance as to what that means for us on a day-to-day basis, and across all of our departments and all of our public services.
'So, I would ask people to stop knee-jerking, and I would ask people to await the Equality Commission guidance, and then let's have a uniform approach.
'I think it's unfortunate that others have taken a different approach on this to this point.
'But you know, this is about compassion. This is about people out there in society who are fearful for their own safety.
'So, let's be a bit compassionate for people. Let's actually take our time, don't knee-jerk to this, and actually understand the ruling and what it means for us here.'
The Supreme Court found that the terms 'woman' and 'sex' in the 2010 Equality Act 'refer to a biological woman and biological sex'.
Northern Ireland is governed by its own equality laws, and the relevant provisions of the Equality Act do not apply in the region.
The Supreme Court ruling is nevertheless expected to influence public policy decisions in Northern Ireland.
The Equality Commission is preparing guidance on the ruling's potential implications on Stormont departments.
Education Minister Paul Givan said individual departments had to comply with their own legal obligations.
'Each minister and every department and indeed public organisation is under their own individual responsibility to ensure that they're complying with the law,' the DUP minister said.
'The UK Supreme Court has now made it clear what the law is when it comes to sex, and it's biological sex based upon male and female.
'So, I'm not going to wait for the Equality Commission, who can provide advice, but it's for those who are responsible to take decisions, and therefore I will be taking decisions around this, and then that will need to be reflected in the guidance that operates within our education system.
'I think it's incumbent on all ministers to reflect the outworkings of the UK Supreme Court, and that's what I'm going to do.'
The Deputy First Minister said the ruling would have 'significant tangential impacts' in Northern Ireland.
Emma Little-Pengelly also said it was for individual departments to obtain their own advice.
'The Equality Commission, or any of these bodies, they are advisory, they're there to give some guidance, but that doesn't stop departments or agencies or bodies either from seeking their own advice and obtaining that advice but, of course, they also have those individual responsibilities under what the law is,' the DUP minister said.
'So of course this is an urgent matter, and I have no doubt that organisations will be taking their own advice on this.'
She added: 'It's important that our public bodies do follow what the law is on this.
'I do feel very strongly that there needs to be those safe spaces for women. It is there for a good reason.
'Women can be very vulnerable in particular situations.
'Women have had their own personal experiences and will want, of course, to have those safe spaces and women-only spaces.
'I think that's absolutely right. I think that's common sense and I think that's what the Supreme Court very clearly set out.
'So, of course, the departments and bodies and organisations should follow that.
'It does apply, of course, wider than just in relation to the Equality Act of 2010 and, of course, I have no doubt that we will see much more discussion and debate about this in due course over the next number of weeks.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
2 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Trans lobby groups 'lied for years' that anyone self identifying as a different gender could access women's' toilets, equality chief says
Transgender people were misled about their rights to female only spaces by lobby groups, according to a senior member of an equality watchdog has said. In April a Supreme Court ruling confirmed the terms woman and sex in the 2010 Equality Act 'refer to a biological woman and biological sex'. Akua Reindorf, a barrister who is one of eight commissioners at the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), said trans people had been deceived about their rights were. Speaking in a personal capacity during a debate about the recent ruling, she said there must be a 'period of correction' to acknowledge women's right to women-only spaces. The decision made it legal for trans people to be banned from women-only sports teams, and from using bathrooms and changing rooms for the gender they lived as. These terms were later supported by interim non-statutory advice given by the EHRC last April. When an audience member at the debate raised fears about the recent Supreme Court ruling and how it could strip away trans peoples rights, barrister and panellist, Naomi Cunningham said: 'It can't be helped, I'm afraid.' In agreement with her fellow panellist, Ms Reindorf said she believed trans lobbyists were at faults for the misunderstanding. 'Unfortunately, young people and trans people have been lied to over many years about what their rights are,' she said. 'It's like Naomi said – I just can't say it in a more diplomatic way than that. They have been lied to, and there has to be a period of correction, because other people have rights' She claimed it boiled down to the law prior to the Supreme Court ruling being misunderstood due to groups contending trans people who self-identified should be treated as their preferred gender. However, this was only the case for the those who had obtained a gender recognition certificate (GRC). The barrister said the amalgamation of different rights made the Equality Act nonviable from a personal capacity. 'The catalyst for many to catch up, belatedly, with the fact that the law never permitted self-ID in the first place,' she said. As such, the feeling of a loss of right of trans people was due to an overwhelming product of 'misinformation' perpetrated by 'lobby group and activists'. Author JK Rowling backed the barrister's recent comments, saying lobby groups lied 'about what the law said'.' However, the head of gender justice at Amnesty International UK, Chiara Capraro, hit back Ms Reindorf's comments. She said: 'The EHRC has the duty to uphold the rights of everyone, including all with protected characteristics. We are concerned that it is failing to do so and is unhelpfully pitting the rights of women and trans people against each other.' A spokesman for the EHRC told The Guardian: 'Akua Reindorf KC spoke at this event in a personal capacity. This was made clear at the event and in the video recording published online. 'As Britain's equality regulator, the Equality and Human Rights Commission upholds and enforces the Equality Act 2010 to ensure everyone is treated fairly, consistent with the Act. 'Our board come from all walks of life and bring with them a breadth of skills and experience. This helps us take impartial decisions, which are always based on evidence and the law.'
Daily Mail
4 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Trans people have been lied to on legal rights, says equalities chief
Transgender people must accept a 'period of correction' over their rights after the Supreme Court ruling on gender because they have been 'lied to' about their legal status for years, an equalities chief says. Akua Reindorf, who is drafting guidance on how to treat trans people following April's ruling on the definition of a woman, added that the blame lay with their lobbyists. Ms Reindorf, a barrister and one of eight commissioners on the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), made her remarks in a personal capacity during a debate hosted by the London School of Economics. She said: 'Unfortunately, young people and trans people have been lied to over many years about what their rights are.' The EHRC has been given the task of developing new guidelines on transgender people for public buildings such as cafes, schools and hospitals, after the Supreme Court ruled transgender women are not legally women. Shortly after the ruling the EHRC released interim guidance advising: 'Trans women (biological men) should not be permitted to use the women's facilities.' Ms Reindorf's words came as the NHS Confederation, which represents hospital trusts, scrapped its old guidance allowing transgender patients to use the toilets of the sex they identify with. A spokesman for the NHS Confederation said their old guidance is now 'dated' and requires updating to align with the Supreme Court ruling. The two developments will be seen as a major blow to transgender activists, who have been petitioning for public organisations such as the NHS to ignore the court's decision. The Girl Guides and Refuge, the largest domestic abuse charity for women, have both said they have no intention in changing their policy on allowing trans women to use their female facilities. Ms Reindorf described their approach as ridiculous, arguing it amounted to a 'huge farce'. She said transgender people 'have been lied to and there has to be a period of correction'. She added: 'The fact is that, until now, trans people without Gender Recognition Certificates, were being grievously misled about their legal rights. 'The correction of self-ID policies and practices will inevitably feel like a loss of rights for trans people. 'This unfortunate position is overwhelmingly a product of the misinformation which was systematically disseminated over a long period by lobby groups and activists.'
The Independent
4 hours ago
- The Independent
Supreme Court will hear Alabama appeal in bid to execute man found to be intellectually disabled
The Supreme Court will consider making it harder for convicted murderers to show their lives should be spared because they are intellectually disabled, according an order released early on Friday after an apparent technological glitch. The justices' action comes in an appeal from Alabama, which is seeking to execute Joseph Clifton Smith. He was sentenced to death for killing a man in 1997. Lower federal courts found Smith is intellectually disabled and thus can't be executed. When it's argued in the fall, the case could be the first in which the Supreme Court cuts back on its 23-year-old landmark ruling that barred the death penalty for people who are intellectually disabled. At issue is what happens in borderline cases, when scores on IQ tests are slightly above 70, which is widely accepted as a marker of intellectual disability. In 2014 and 2017, the court somewhat eased the burden of showing intellectual disability in those cases. It's the second time in about a year that an online error resulted in an early release from the high court. An opinion in an abortion case was accidently posted on its website a day early in June 2024. The court's landmark opinion overturning abortion as a constitutional right also went out early, though those circumstances were different because the case was leaked. This time, the court released a set of orders set for Monday after an 'apparent software malfunction' sent out early notifications.
