Campaigners take step in legal action over toilet guidance after gender ruling
Good Law Project (GLP) said on Friday that it had sent a pre-action letter to the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) over the guidance, which it said 'authorises and approves unlawful discrimination'.
GLP and the individuals – two of whom are trans and one of whom is intersex – have also sent the letter to the women and equalities minister, Bridget Phillipson, and said that they had asked for a response within seven days.
It follows the Supreme Court ruling in April that said the words 'woman' and 'sex' in the Equality Act 2010 refer to a biological woman and biological sex, following a challenge against the Scottish Government by campaign group For Women Scotland.
The EHRC issued interim guidance following the judgment that said trans women 'should not be permitted to use the women's facilities' in workplaces or public-facing services like shops and hospitals, with the same applying for trans men using men's toilets.
But GLP said on Friday that the guidance is 'wrong in law' and the definition of gender in the Equality Act 2010 'does not read across' to legislation governing use of toilets, to which 'the normal legal meaning of those words, which include lived gender, continues to apply'.
Jolyon Maugham KC, the founder and executive director of GLP, said: 'The stark and needlessly cruel position adopted by the Government and the EHRC humiliates trans people by forcing them to use the wrong toilets and obliges them to reveal deeply personal information about their gender to complete strangers just to take a wee.
'It is deeply unkind, far removed from the national mood of mutual respect and live and let live, and is unlawful to boot.'
The Supreme Court challenge was brought by campaign group For Women Scotland against the Scottish government (Lucy North/PA)
GLP also said that if the EHRC guidance is correct in law, it breaches the UK's obligations under the Human Rights Act 1998.
The commission said it issued its interim guidance last month as 'many people have questions about the judgment and what it means for them'.
But it also said that trans people 'should not be put in a position where there are no facilities for them to use'.
It added that it would undertake a public consultation on how the judgment should be reflected in a more detailed code of conduct, which it aimed to finalise for ministerial approval by June.
In the pre-action letter, GLP said that the claim related to the guidance 'purporting to set out, inter alia, that employers and providers of services which are open to the public are legally required to prohibit trans people from using the toilets in their acquired gender'.
It continued that it believed that the guidance 'evidently represents what the commission regards as the indisputable legal consequences' of the judgment, and that the impact of the guidance 'should not be underestimated'.
It said: 'This proposed challenge is not to an 'interim' position, but guidance on an interpretation of the law which the commission has made clear is not up for discussion in the forthcoming consultation.
'The notion that the judgment puts beyond debate that trans women must be excluded from women's toilets in workplaces and services open to the public and trans men must be excluded from men's toilets is an extraordinary – and legally erroneous – position to have taken.
'The claimants will be challenging that guidance on the basis that it is irrational and/or wrong in law.'
A Government spokesperson said: 'We do not comment on ongoing legal proceedings.
'The UK Supreme Court has ruled on the For Women for Scotland case with a unanimous opinion.
'We will consider the updated draft code of practice from the EHRC once it has been submitted and, importantly, engage with them to ensure it provides the certainty and clarity service providers and businesses need, in line with the Supreme Court ruling.'
The EHRC has been approached for comment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
STV News
16 minutes ago
- STV News
Swinney to chair youth violence summit after stabbings and classroom violence
John Swinney is set to chair a summit on youth violence as he attempts to clamp down on knife crime among young people. The cross-party meeting follows the deaths of two teenagers in Scotland this year from separate stabbings. It also comes as teachers report rising levels of classroom violence and misogynistic behaviour among pupils. Thursday's summit will hear from the justice and education secretaries, ministers for children and for victims, along with cross-party MSPs, youth workers and those delivering violence reduction in Scotland. It follows discussions led by Mr Swinney to hear young people's and families' experiences and ideas on possible solutions, and will focus on education and community engagement with young people and possible strategies preventing them from turning to anti-social behaviour or carrying a weapon. Angela Constance, the Justice Secretary, has admitted that 'more needs to be done' to clamp down on violence. Earlier this month, the Scottish Government pledged that funding for the Scottish Violence Reduction Unit will rise by 7% to £1.217 million, which reversed earlier plans to cut its budget. Despite several high-profile recent murders among teenagers, Police Scotland said that serious assaults by those aged 11 to 18 fell by 27% between 2019/20 and 2024/25, from 428 to 313. Ahead of the meeting, Scottish Liberal Democrat leader Alex Cole-Hamilton called for greater investment in youth work. Mr Cole-Hamilton, who was a youth worker before becoming an MSP, accused the SNP of presiding over the 'quiet death' of youth work. He said: 'For the best part of 20 years, I was a youth worker, helping some of the most disengaged young people get their lives back on track. 'That experience taught me that no child is inherently bad. Most of the time, they are just in need of some direction, a need that has only been fuelled by the isolating impact of lockdown. 'That's where youth work comes in: it provides young people with the direction they need and gives them a positive adult role model who is neither a teacher nor a parent. 'It teaches teenagers to come out of their comfort zone, helps them rebuild their sense of self-worth and fosters a whole host of key life skills. 'Since the pandemic, however, the SNP have presided over the quiet death of youth work. Budgets have been squeezed, services have struggled to survive, just when we need them the most. 'While acts of violence require a strong response, punishing predominantly law-abiding young people cannot be our broader solution. We need youth work to pre-empt and prevent those acts of violence, to properly engage young people in society and lay the foundations for them to succeed in life.' The Scottish Government has been approached for comment. Get all the latest news from around the country Follow STV News Scan the QR code on your mobile device for all the latest news from around the country
The Herald Scotland
30 minutes ago
- The Herald Scotland
SNP failures will discourage anyone who wants to move to Scotland
Why would anyone come here when they will be paying higher taxes if they earn over £30,318? We may need people who will be paid a lower salary but they may be married to a higher earner. Why would anyone come north of the central belt when our infrastructure doesn't lend itself to easy travel to the rest of the country? Imagine how much safer and quicker a dualled A9 and A96 would make it to get to the capital. Why would anyone come here when there is a housing shortage, long NHS waits, falling education standards and a party in power that is more interested in seeking grievance than improving our lives? The best way to make people want to come here is to offer them a great incentive to work and live here. That means doing the hard work to improve our NHS, provide drug rehabilitation facilities, restore our first class education system and stop taxing people more than those in England. Of course the SNP have had 18 years to do that, and failed at every turn. Jane Lax, Aberlour. Read more letters: Hospitality for Hamas Stephen Flynn has promoted hatred of Israel to the core of his programme for Scotland ('Stephen Flynn: Independent Scotland would cut ties with Israel', June 10). Perhaps he would like to invite Hamas leaders for state visits including the finest of whisky and golf hospitality. Tim Cox, Bern 6, Switzerland. More left-wing nonsense Anne Wimberley (letters, June 9) sadly displays the usual failings of the left – and indeed in numerous ways. First, she brands all those with views contrary to her own as 'far right', echoing the hysterical nonsense of much of today's liberal press. She then makes the usual liberal-left generalisation of grouping all migration as one, totally failing to make any distinction between out-of-control illegal immigration and those valued workers arriving through valid, approved and documented routes. Finally, she blindly declares invalid statistics as facts with no regard for the true figures, her exaggerated claim of the NHS being kept running by 40% immigrant staff being utter nonsense. The true figure is around 19% in England, and less than 10% in Scotland. None of those have arrived the UK in large groups of undocumented young men via rubber boats across the English Channel, mobile phones in hand and eager to claim their financial benefits, free accommodation, free education, and free healthcare from a system already under strain and made worse every day by the demands of their illegal presence. Steph Johnson, Glasgow The wealthy won't have to worry Good to see that Westminster's man in Scotland, Ian Murray, does not want public money to be spent on 'millionaire pensioners' ('Scottish Government refuses to rule out changes to pensioners' winter payment', June 10). I trust that no rich MP, peer or peeress of pensioner age will be able to claim heating, travel or other allowances from the public purse in future under Mr Murray's strictures. This Labour Party, however, always favours the rich over the poor, so the wealthy won't have to worry. GR Weir, Ochiltree. How did Reeves justify her sums? There is an obvious question for John Swinney et al to consider in case they are minded to follow Rachel Reeves' Damascene conversion and pay Scottish pensioners a greater winter fuel payment than presently planned, but means-tested on the basis of their annual income ('Chancellor confirms a major U- turn on winter fuel payment', June 10). As I understand it, Ms Reeves has set the qualifying income in England and Wales at £35,000 or below, although she has yet to explain how that means-testing will be achieved, and at what cost. Certainly, qualifying pensioners in Scotland, where it is colder in winter, should receive a payment at least equal to that considered necessary in England and Wales. My difficulty is that I don't know how Ms Reeves justifies the means-testing figure of £35,000. At first sight it appears reasonable but as it is a gross figure, would a net figure not be a more appropriate yardstick as being what a pensioner has left to pay for fuel and everything else? If a net income figure would be too difficult and costly to establish, simply increase the gross figure a little. Alan Fitzpatrick, Dunlop, Ayrshire. * I NOTE that the age at which people can start to receive state pension is rising again. Presumably this is because it is the older age group which is working and paying tax. Perhaps the government should raise the age at which unemployment benefit starts – eg, 16 to 18, or 16 to 21 – to encourage the parents of younger people to get a job. Elizabeth Hands, Armadale. EU membership for Scotland? Not so fast So John Swinney claims that EU membership could bring an independent Scotland 'security, stability and opportunity.' I, too, regret Brexit, but let us never forget that all those voting for independence in 2014, by voting for Scexit also voted for Brexit – Brussels made this very clear before the referendum. Plus, perhaps unsurprisingly, Swinney ignores that Scotland's excessively high deficit levels – over three times higher than the 3% tolerated by EU fiscal rules – means that, whatever narrative SNP politicians might spin, the EU would reject an application from Scotland, probably for many years, until Holyrood's overspending was brought under control by cutting public services and raising taxes. Martin Redfern, Melrose, Roxburghshire. Sarwar's TV interview Sir Tom Clarke states (letters, June 11) that'As a Labour voter I was very proud' of Anas Sarwar's interview with Martin Geissler. He was entitled to be, of course, but I saw the interview live, and I'm afraid I continue to think it was one of the most horrendous ones I have listened to, because of the arrogant Mr Sarwar treating the occasion as a dictatorial Party Political Broadcast and brooking no interference from the courteous Mr Geissler. I live in the Southside of the City (although the SNP now describes us as East End), and I have to say that my friends, neighbours and acquaintances – of all political persuasions – do not agree with Sir Tom. Oh, the wonder and pleasure to live in a free society – I think! Walter Paul, Glasgow. Destabilising South Africa Donald Trump's false charge of race discrimination by the South African government against white farmers and offering them refuge in the US is an act of hostility against South Africa. Since South Africa took Israel to the International Court of Justice charging it with genocide the US has ramped up its actions against South Africa. Trump's Presidential Order, 'Addressing the Egregious Actions of South Africa', promoted the re-settlement of Afrikaners in the US and stated that South Africa had taken aggressive positions towards the United States including 'accusing Israel of genocide.' It added: 'The United States cannot support the government of South Africa in its undermining United States foreign policy which poses national security threats to our Nation… and our interests.' It concluded 'the United States shall not provide aid or assistance to South Africa.' It could not be made clearer that if you disagree with US support for Israel's actions then you will be punished. In South Africa's colonial and apartheid past, land distribution was grossly unequal on the basis of race. This remains the case. Whites own 70% of the land while being only 7% of the population. South Africa in addressing this issue passed the Land Expropriation Act. Land can be expropriated without compensation only in strictly defined circumstances. The United States intervention, making false claims about the Act and what is happening to white farmers, whilst offering fast-tracked refuge to Afrikaners is a disruptive interference in the affairs of a sovereign country. The US actions seem designed to destabilise South Africa and stop its support for the Palestinians. South Africa should be applauded for its humanitarian stance in support of the Palestinians and should also be assisted in its journey to overcome 300 years of colonialism and apartheid. Brian Filling, Chair, Action for Southern Africa (ACTSA) Scotland, Glasgow.
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
Winter fuel payment u-turn exposes flaws in SNP's universalism
Reeves maintained that circumstances have changed so much that the u-turn now represents a model of safe fiscal navigation. She was bound to claim that and I don't really care, so long as it allows a costly political mistake to be neutralised. In fact, Reeves' statement indicated quite a few 'u-turns' which have headed the government in more recognisable Labour directions. Thank goodness for that too, I say. People voted for change and it needs to be more visible. In the run-up to last week's by-election, lots of voters were still angry about Reeves' initial action on Winter Fuel Payments but not enough, as it proved, to change the outcome. Labour has had the sense to listen and respond with more positive messages. The Chancellor was not just redistributionist in her commitments to health, education, housing and so on, which apply directly to England. She also spread serious investment around the nations and regions, on top of the record £52 billion to the Scottish Government. Read more from Brian Wilson: Her England-only funding will lead to lots of 'Barnett consequentials' for Scotland. Normally, these are taken with one ungrateful hand and recycled with the other as Scottish Government largesse, without a backward reference to where the money came from. Anas Sarwar will need to keep reminding them and this time more attention must be paid to whether the extra billions are used for priorities which generated them. For example, every penny of 'consequentials' which flow from extra NHS spending in England should be spent on the NHS in Scotland, which has not always happened in the past. There should be complete transparency around this and how other Barnett money, on top of the £52 billion, is spent, and the value we get. However convoluted the route to get here, Winter Fuel Payments now offer a perfect example of why 'universalism' is one pillar of nationalist rule which is long overdue for a 'u-turn', preferably under a new Holyrood administration which has the courage to take the argument on. Under Reeves' plans, pensioners with income under £35,000 a year will get the Winter Fuel Payment of two or three hundred pounds. Those above that amount will not. The vast majority of people will regard that compromise as somewhere between fair and generous. I haven't heard anyone plead the case for restoring universalism. Except, of course, in Scotland where the nationalists committed themselves to paying every pensioner £100, whether they need it or not. It was a political gimmick to demonstrate generosity, humanity etc in comparison to Whitehall, to be funded entirely from the Scottish budget (at the expense of something else). Now the money will come from the Treasury and it will be up to Edinburgh to divvy it up. If they persist in giving £100 to pensioners above the £35,000 threshold, it will either be at the expense of the less well-off or an entirely pointless use of scarce resources, other than to justify 'universalism'. Maybe that example could open the door to an overdue wider debate in Scotland around 'universalism' which opposition politicians tend to steer clear of because the assumption has developed that 'free things are popular' even if their effect is to widen wealth and attainment gaps, rather than narrow them. In a world of unlimited resources, universalism may be a desirable concept, to be recouped through correspondingly high taxation. In the world we inhabit, on the other hand, it is a lofty-sounding device for transferring scarce resources from those who have least to others who are much better off. That is a deception which the SNP have deployed to great advantage. Anyone who challenges it is accused of wanting to reintroduce 'means-testing' which carries the stigma of 1930s oppressors keeping money from the poor. In the 2020s, however, the case for 'means-testing' is to stop giving money to those who don't need it. Another obvious example of this con-trick involves 'free tuition' which now plays a large part in bringing Scotland's universities to the point of penury, forcing large-scale redundancies, excluding Scottish students from hundreds of desirable courses and making our great seats of learning more dependent on decisions taken in Beijing and Seoul than Edinburgh. 'Universalism is one pillar of nationalist rule which is long overdue for a 'u-turn', preferably under a new Holyrood administration' (Image: Radmat) At some point, politicians must have the courage to call out this deception for what it is. The guiding principle that nobody should be prohibited by economic circumstances from going to university does not equate to 'universalism'. Quite the opposite is true. Universalism actually works against those who need far more support if the dial on educational attainment is ever going to move, which it hasn't done in Scotland under present policies and posturing. If public money is to be better spent in Scotland to attack poverty and disadvantage while creating a thriving economy, then shibboleths will have to be challenged. The Scottish Government has never been short of money and certainly won't be now. The question of how it is spent and wasted should be the battlefield of political debate. Another satisfactory 'u-turn' confirmed yesterday was recognition that nuclear power will be an essential component in the transition to a clean energy future. I wish the same obvious conclusion had been reached 20 years ago, when I was arguing for it within government, or could be recognised even now by the student politicians in Edinburgh. With renewables and nuclear, Scotland really could have been a world leader on net zero. Without nuclear, it will still need fossil fuels for baseload for the foreseeable future with imports, rather oddly, regarded by some as morally superior to those extracted from the North Sea. Bring on another u-turn! Brian Wilson is a former Labour Party politician. He was MP for Cunninghame North from 1987 until 2005 and served as a Minister of State from 1997 to 2003.
