Public bodies told to look at how equality laws are implemented after Supreme Court rules on 'woman' definition
Public bodies have been told to look at how equality laws are implemented after the Supreme Court ruling on the definition of a woman, a minister has said.
On Wednesday, judges at the UK's highest court unanimously ruled the definition of a "woman" and "sex" in the Equality Act 2010 refers to "a biological woman and biological sex".
Health minister Karin Smyth told Anna Jones on Sky News Breakfast: "Obviously, public bodies have been asked to look at their own guidance.
"And we will do that very, very carefully."
She said the court's ruling was "very clear" about women's rights being defined by sex, which she said "will give clarity to companies".
But she warned against public bodies making statements "that may alarm people", telling them to take their time to look at their guidance.
2:10
The ruling marked the culmination of a long battle between campaign group For Women Scotland and the Scottish government after the group brought a case arguing sex-based protections should only apply to people born female.
Judge Lord Hodge said the ruling should not be read as "a triumph of one or more groups in our society at the expense of another".
He said the Equality Act 2010 "gives transgender people protection, not only against discrimination through the protected characteristic of gender reassignment, but also against direct discrimination, indirect discrimination and harassment in substance in their acquired gender".
Ms Smyth said those who identify as transgender "will feel concerned" after the ruling but said the Gender Recognition Act still stands and gives people who identify differently to the sex they were born in "the dignity and privacy of presenting differently".
She said NHS policy of having same sex wards remains, and the NHS has been looking at how to support both transgender men and women.
1:48
Scotland's First Minister John Swinney said the Scottish government "accepts" the judgment and said the ruling "gives clarity".
Trina Budge, director of For Women Scotland, said it was a "victory for women's rights" and said the case was "never about trans rights" as transgender people are "fully protected in law".
"It means there's absolute clarity in law regarding what a woman is. We know for sure now that we are referring to the biological sex class of women," she told Sky News.
"And that when we see a women-only space, it means exactly that. Just women. No men. Not even if they have a gender recognition certificate."
2:12
Transgender woman and Scottish Greens activist Ellie Gomersall said the ruling "represents yet another attack on the rights of trans people to live our lives in peace".
Scottish Greens MSP Maggie Chapman added: "This is a deeply concerning ruling for human rights and a huge blow to some of the most marginalised people in our society."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
STV News
14 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
28 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 Independent
43 minutes ago
- The Independent
Britain morphing into ‘National Health State', says think tank
Britain is turning into a 'National Health State', a think tank has said after the Chancellor gave the NHS a major funding boost in her spending review. The health service was the big winner of Wednesday's spending review, receiving an extra £29 billion per year for day-to-day spending and more cash for capital investment. Overnight, the Resolution Foundation said Rachel Reeves's announcements had followed a recent trend that saw increases for the NHS come at the expense of other public services. Ruth Curtice, chief executive of the Resolution Foundation, said: 'Health accounted for 90% of the extra public service spending, continuing a trend that is seeing the British state morph into a National Health State, with half of public service spending set to be on health by the end of the decade.' Defence was another of Wednesday's winners, Ms Curtice said, receiving a significant increase in capital spending while other departments saw an overall £3.6 billion real-terms cut in investment. The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) made similar arguments about 'substantial' investment in the NHS and defence coming at the expense of other departments, although the think tank's director Paul Johnson warned the money may not be enough. He said: 'Aiming to get back to meeting the NHS 18-week target for hospital waiting times within this Parliament is enormously ambitious – an NHS funding settlement below the long-run average might not measure up. 'And on defence, it's entirely possible that an increase in the Nato spending target will mean that maintaining defence spending at 2.6% of GDP no longer cuts the mustard.' Ms Curtice added that low and middle-income families had also done well out of the spending review 'after two rounds of painful tax rises and welfare cuts', with the poorest fifth of families benefiting from an average of £1,700 in extra spending on schools, hospitals and the police. She warned that, without economic growth, another round of tax rises was likely to come in the autumn as the Chancellor seeks to balance the books. She said: 'The extra money in this spending review has already been accounted for in the last forecast. 'But a weaker economic outlook and the unfunded changes to winter fuel payments mean the Chancellor will likely need to look again at tax rises in the autumn.' Speaking after delivering her spending review, Ms Reeves insisted she would not have to raise taxes to cover her spending review. She told GB News: 'Every penny of this is funded through the tax increases and the changes to the fiscal rules that we set out last autumn.'
