Latest news with #EqualityAndHumanRightsCommission
Telegraph
07-08-2025
- Entertainment
- Telegraph
Fringe venue removes signs allowing biological men to use women's toilets
An Edinburgh Fringe venue has removed signs allowing biological men to use women's toilets after a backlash. Underbelly Bristo Square, which is home to multiple small theatres, put up a sign outside the female bathroom telling attendees to 'use whichever toilet best fits your identity or expression'. Women's rights activists accused the venue of breaking the law after the Supreme Court said transgender women were not legally women in a landmark ruling. The judgement by Britain's most senior judges in April prompted new guidance from the Equality and Human Rights Commission, stating that although it is not compulsory for public services to have single-sex facilities such as lavatories, it could be indirect sex discrimination against women if the only lavatories provided are mixed-sex. Venue on 'rocky ground' Following the backlash, the venue has now removed the sign – leaving the female bathroom symbol standing alone outside the toilet. A sign outside the unisex toilet, between the male and female loos, also states: 'individual cubicles. Anyone welcome'. A spokesman for Underbelly told The Telegraph: 'We have updated our signage and facilities to clearly provide separate toilets for men only, for women only, alongside a separate inclusive option for anyone regardless of how they identify.' The row was sparked after a photo was posted on social media by Alex McDonald, who said: 'My wife is incredibly upset by this. Maybe @edfringe could act and just remove them before @PoliceScotland get involved.' Susan Smith, from the campaign group who brought the gender case to the Supreme Court, warned that the venue was on 'rocky ground' because of the disclaimer. Ms Smith of For Women Scotland told The Telegraph: 'This is plainly unlawful. You can't have a sign like that. You can either have a mixed-sex space or a single-sex space. It's not possible to have both at the same time. It's either one or the other.' 'I think Underbelly is on rocky ground because something could happen in those toilets, like a sexual assault or someone even recording an individual undertaking their business.' 'Flouting the law' She added: 'Underbelly should remove these signs as soon as possible. If they fail to do so, then they could be flouting the law.' Helen Joyce, director of advocacy for human-rights charity Sex Matters, which campaigns for clarity about biological sex, added: 'There's no lawful basis for putting up male and female signs – for toilets, changing rooms and so on – and then declaring that you mean something other than sex.' Underbelly Bristo Square is hosting hundreds of productions throughout the Fringe, with genres ranging from children's shows, theatre, comedy, musicals, opera, cabaret and variety.
The Guardian
30-07-2025
- Politics
- The Guardian
Labour settles claims brought by 20 people over leaked antisemitism dossier
Labour has settled claims brought by 20 people, mainly former staffers, who featured in a leaked internal document about antisemitism within the party, with the costs estimated to be close to £2m. The settlements include a payout to Labour's former elections chief Patrick Heneghan, who was falsely accused in the dossier of having tried to sabotage Jeremy Corbyn's chances of winning the 2017 election. It is understood the payouts will total just under £1m, but with Labour paying both sides' legal fees the cost to the party will be near £2m. This puts the total legal costs for Labour connected to the dossier to more than £4m, with court documents released last year showing the party spent £2.4m on its own eventually abandoned lawsuit pursuing five separate staffers it accused of being behind the leak. The 800-page document was produced under Corbyn's leadership. It was billed as being part of a submission to the Equality and Human Rights Commission for the rights watchdog's inquiry into antisemitism within Labour, but was never submitted. It was instead anonymously leaked and included hundreds of private WhatsApp messages from named staff detailing hostility towards Corbyn and his allies. The report said factional hostility contributed to an ineffective handling of antisemitism complaints, and set out claims of anti-black racism, Islamophobia, sexism and bullying. The 20 people whose cases have been settled took action over alleged defamation or the unauthorised use of personal data, or both. Six opted to be named, including Heneghan, who had previously labelled the idea he sabotaged the 2017 election a 'stab-in-the-back' conspiracy theory. A statement by the named claimants' legal team, read to the court, said this claim was among a series of false allegations against Heneghan. Also named was Labour's former head of governance John Stolliday, who took action over the leak of private messages and what the statement called 'false and damaging' allegations that he tried to obstruct action on antisemitism in order to undermine Corbyn. A staffer in the governance unit, Fraser Welsh, took action over similar claims. Another named party was Joe Goldberg, then a Labour councillor in Haringey, north London. The statement to the court said the leaked document made 'wholly untrue' claims that Goldberg was Islamophobic and had tried to smear another party member with an unfounded allegation of antisemitism. Another payout went to Ben Santhouse, who had made a confidential complaint to the party about alleged antisemitism and was then named in the leaked report as 'a vexatious complainant who made disproportionate and unfounded allegations of antisemitism against individuals', claims the document read to the court said were defamatory. According to the claimants, as well as not being told about the fact their private messages and emails were being leaked, the dossier in some cases used the messages to create misleading narratives. In the wake of the furore over the leaked dossier, Labour under Keir Starmer's leadership commissioned a report by the senior lawyer Martin Forde QC. Published in 2022, it concluded that destructive infighting within the party under Corbyn's tenure meant antisemitism was often used as a 'factional weapon' by his critics, and then denied by his supporters. It also said it was 'highly unlikely' that staff sought to sabotage the 2017 election, and that the leaked report was itself a factional document with an agenda to advance. The Forde report did not, however, agree with claims that derogatory messages in the leaked dossier were 'cherrypicked and selectively edited'. Sign up to First Edition Our morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters after newsletter promotion In June last year, Labour withdrew legal action against five former staff members, including Corbyn's former chief of staff Karie Murphy and his former director of communications Seumas Milne, who were accused of leaking the report. All of the five, also comprising Georgie Robertson, Laura Murray and Harry Hayball, had vehemently denied being responsible. The Forde report said it had been unable to determine who leaked the document. Separate to the dossier, in 2020 the party apologised to seven former employees and a BBC journalist after admitting it had defamed them in the aftermath of a Panorama investigation into its handling of antisemitism. The settlement to the ex-staff and the reporter John Ware was believed to have cost Labour about £600,000. It retracted claims by the party that the whistleblowers were motivated by opposition to Corbyn and that Ware had acted misleadingly. A Labour spokesperson said: 'The party welcomes the resolution of this matter.' It is understood the latest claims were settled before last year's general election, although the details have only been set out now. The party did not comment on the payouts or costs.
Telegraph
01-07-2025
- Politics
- Telegraph
Labour's pick for equalities chair backs gender-critical feminists
Labour's choice to be the next chairman of the equalities watchdog has championed the right of women who oppose gender ideology to speak out. Dr Mary-Ann Stephenson said 'freedom of expression' was very important to her, as she spoke out against women being 'harassed or sacked from their jobs for peaceful expression of legally protected beliefs'. Appearing before MPs and peers, she criticised trans rights activists' attempts to 'no platform' women's rights groups as part of their 'attempts to close down debate'. Dr Stephenson, the director of the Women's Budget Group, is the Government's pick to lead the Equality and Human Rights Commission when Baroness Falkner, the incumbent, steps down later this year. 'Attempts to close down debate' But supporters of trans rights have criticised the choice, accusing her of having attended women's rights conferences at which gender-critical views were aired. On Tuesday she was challenged at a joint meeting of the Lords and Commons' equalities committees over her decision to sign a letter calling for open, non-violent discussion on gender issues, a letter which some activists have described as transphobic. 'They were about my opposition to practices of no platforming and attempts to close down debate,' she said. 'I started my professional career at Article 19 which is an international human rights organisation which focuses on freedom of expression. It's a really important value to me. 'I don't think freedom of expression should be an absolute value but it should be restricted in very limited circumstances, and I think that attempts to close down debate in any area is generally a mistake. 'To be honest I think that had we been able to have better dialogue on some of these issues 10 years ago we might be in a better position than we are in now.' Employment tribunal Dr Stephenson defended her decision to donate to a lawyer who was discriminated against at work for opposing trans self-ID. She also donated £25 to the legal fund of Allison Bailey, a barrister who took her chambers to court after they asked her to remove two gender-critical tweets. An employment tribunal found she had been discriminated against after clerks gave her less work to do. 'The donation was very specifically because I was upset at seeing women being harassed or sacked from their jobs for peaceful expression of legally protected beliefs,' she said. Dr Stephenson added: 'The debate has been so toxic that people just stepped away… so you end up with discussions taking place on social media.'
Times
01-07-2025
- Politics
- Times
Kirk fiasco shows SNP must stop dragging its feet on single-sex spaces
John Swinney is waiting to hear full guidance from the Equality and Human Rights Commission before acting JANE BARLOW/PA A Church of Scotland community centre in Fife might seem an improbable location for a fresh controversy over single-sex spaces but it is a wholly apposite, and indeed typical, one. A mother objected to biological males using the female toilets at the venue while her daughter's drama class was using the centre at the same time. Initial assurances that this would be attended to were then supplanted by fresh 'guidance' from the Kirk's 'safeguarding department' that toilets were not necessarily to be considered single-sex at all. The Kirk has now returned to its first position. The Church of Scotland may be forgiven its confusion. It is merely following a baleful example set by the Scottish government, which insists it is not yet in a position to implement the law on single-sex spaces as clarified by the Supreme Court in the case of For Women Scotland vs Scottish ministers.
