1-20 of 92 results for subject:Women
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.279 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.009 seconds
- Search query
- subject:Women
- We searched for
- subject_t:Women OR subject_t:Females OR subject_ses:91244
Type
House
Session
Year
Department
Member
More
Primary member
More
Answering member
More
Legislative stage
Legislation
Subject
More
Publisher
I think I have said before that this is a complex issue. It has also been a debate—
I think I have said before that this is a complex issue. It has also been a debate—
My Lords, I thank the Minister for his reply. A quarter of all women have experienced male violence at least once in their lives. That is one reason why biological males are excluded from women’s safe spaces—except, that is, in government. For more than a year, the Government have failed women by not restoring their single-sex spaces. The Empire State Building was built in a year and 45 days, but that does not seem to be enough time for the Government to sort out some toilets. Either the Government do not really care about the safety of women and girls or they are just incompetent. Which is it?
Can I just say this? It has been a debate that has been rather toxic. What we need is a bit of understanding and compassion. There has been no delay. We have been looking at this very carefully and we have been clear that the Supreme Court judgment must be complied with. There is no doubt about that. We have not been delaying anything. We have been clear from the beginning that the Supreme Court judgment must be complied with. If people have any doubt about it, they can seek legal advice. There are complex issues in relation to policies and
procedures, not least that we have clear legal obligations to ensure that there is equality and fair treatment for all in every sector of our employment.
Can I just say this? It has been a debate that has been rather toxic. What we need is a bit of understanding and compassion. There has been no delay. We have been looking at this very carefully and we have been clear that the Supreme Court judgment must be complied with. There is no doubt about that. We have not been delaying anything. We have been clear from the beginning that the Supreme Court judgment must be complied with. If people have any doubt about it, they can seek legal advice. There are complex issues in relation to policies and
procedures, not least that we have clear legal obligations to ensure that there is equality and fair treatment for all in every sector of our employment.
My Lords, I thank the Minister for his reply. A quarter of all women have experienced male violence at least once in their lives. That is one reason why biological males are excluded from women’s safe spaces—except, that is, in government. For more than a year, the Government have failed women by not restoring their single-sex spaces. The Empire State Building was built in a year and 45 days, but that does not seem to be enough time for the Government to sort out some toilets. Either the Government do not really care about the safety of women and girls or they are just incompetent. Which is it?
My noble friend will understand that I must declare an interest: I am on the programme board for R&R. The original legislation made it clear that accessibility and equality are key parts of the R&R programme. That is the most important thing. It is not simply about access to toilets; people cannot even get around this building, and that is an issue that we need to address. I am afraid I cannot be tempted to comment on the code. As my noble friend knows, that is now subject to purdah, but I can say that we have asked the EHRC to provide information on costs so that Ministers can make a fully informed decision. That is part of the process. We have asked the EHRC to provide a de minimis proportionate cost assessment so that Ministers can have sight of the cost implications that the guidance will incur when taking their decision.
My noble friend will understand that I must declare an interest: I am on the programme board for R&R. The original legislation made it clear that accessibility and equality are key parts of the R&R programme. That is the most important thing. It is not simply about access to toilets; people cannot even get around this building, and that is an issue that we need to address. I am afraid I cannot be tempted to comment on the code. As my noble friend knows, that is now subject to purdah, but I can say that we have asked the EHRC to provide information on costs so that Ministers can make a fully informed decision. That is part of the process. We have asked the EHRC to provide a de minimis proportionate cost assessment so that Ministers can have sight of the cost implications that the guidance will incur when taking their decision.
My Lords, can I ask my noble friend the Minister a practical question relating to the place that we all work in? The Government have responsibilities not only for the Whitehall department but for the Palace of Westminster, which is, as noble Lords know, a grade 1 listed historic building, presenting a particular architectural challenge. Can my noble friend say whether guidance on implementing the judgment will include practical advice on accommodating third spaces in buildings where structural adaptation is constrained and whether we are going to receive that notice and advice in time to act on it? Indeed, will it be incorporated into the R&R proposals?
I have huge respect for the noble Baroness, but I do not accept for one moment that there has been a deliberate delay in implementing this code. I have been very clear. These are complex issues and they need proper consideration. The purdah arrangements are clear. We have received advice from the Cabinet Secretary. I have been very clear that we cannot comment on the code. The Government have made a commitment that the code will be laid as soon as possible after the election. That means in May—not in spring, not in six months, in
May. We are being very clear. Cat Little, the Cabinet Office Permanent Secretary, wrote to the Women and Equalities Select Committee’s chair to explain the background to the Minister’s Statement on 14 April. That letter is in the Library of the House of Commons. It clarifies restrictions during pre-election periods as set out in the guidance to civil servants. It is absolutely clear. I can reassure the noble Baroness that we are following proper process in relation to this code.
I have huge respect for the noble Baroness, but I do not accept for one moment that there has been a deliberate delay in implementing this code. I have been very clear. These are complex issues and they need proper consideration. The purdah arrangements are clear. We have received advice from the Cabinet Secretary. I have been very clear that we cannot comment on the code. The Government have made a commitment that the code will be laid as soon as possible after the election. That means in May—not in spring, not in six months, in
May. We are being very clear. Cat Little, the Cabinet Office Permanent Secretary, wrote to the Women and Equalities Select Committee’s chair to explain the background to the Minister’s Statement on 14 April. That letter is in the Library of the House of Commons. It clarifies restrictions during pre-election periods as set out in the guidance to civil servants. It is absolutely clear. I can reassure the noble Baroness that we are following proper process in relation to this code.
My Lords, it is becoming a little repetitive for the House to hear for over a year that the Government must comply with the law of the land. We understand that the Minister’s role is to represent the Government, so I wonder why he cannot explain why he is not complying with the law. He has mentioned the pre-election sensitivity period now, which is the latest reason given by the Government for not laying the EHRC code of practice. I have looked it up and more than 60 statutory instruments have been laid during this period. That pre-election guidance, published by his Government on 2 March, applies only to primary legislation. Will the Minister tell the House whether he has consulted the Permanent Secretary of the Cabinet Office and/or the legislative secretariat of the Cabinet Office to find out whether he can lay the code? If he has not done so, why not? Will he also lay that advice in the Library for all to see?
I do not understand why I need to repeat myself so often. The Prime Minister has been absolutely clear. The Supreme Court judgment must be complied with. It is the law. Whether or not the Conservative Party needs to explain to the electorate, “We will comply with the law”, there is no doubt about it: we will ensure that the law is complied with. However, there are implications for policies that need to be properly examined, which is why we have the code and why it needs to be considered as a whole. It is disingenuous to constantly say, “Conservative councils will comply with the law” when every council has an obligation to comply with it.
I do not understand why I need to repeat myself so often. The Prime Minister has been absolutely clear. The Supreme Court judgment must be complied with. It is the law. Whether or not the Conservative Party needs to explain to the electorate, “We will comply with the law”, there is no doubt about it: we will ensure that the law is complied with. However, there are implications for policies that need to be properly examined, which is why we have the code and why it needs to be considered as a whole. It is disingenuous to constantly say, “Conservative councils will comply with the law” when every council has an obligation to comply with it.
My Lords, on 16 April, the one-year anniversary of the landmark Supreme Court judgment confirming that sex in the Equality Act 2010 refers to biological sex, the Conservative Party announced that Conservative-run councils will publish clear, legally compliant policies on single-sex spaces and services. I also confirm that Conservative-run councils will publish their own single-sex policies and ensure that they are operational. Conservative-run councils will also act to ensure that funding and contracts will be withdrawn from third-party providers that do not comply with the law. Will the Government act now to ensure that Labour-run councils—indeed, all councils—understand that they must comply with the law?
I thank my noble friend. There has been constant reference to the Government’s position on the protection of women, and we are absolutely committed to ensure that we can absolutely say that violence against women and girls is a thing of the past. We are absolutely determined to end that. Violence against women and girls is not about toilets. But we have been very clear on single-sex spaces, and the Supreme Court judgment is clear. To answer the specific question from my noble friend, we have asked the EHRC to consider costs so that we can have a full consideration of the implications of those costs before a decision is made. However, I will not be tempted into commenting on the contents of the code because of the purdah arrangements that are in place.
I thank my noble friend. There has been constant reference to the Government’s position on the protection of women, and we are absolutely committed to ensure that we can absolutely say that violence against women and girls is a thing of the past. We are absolutely determined to end that. Violence against women and girls is not about toilets. But we have been very clear on single-sex spaces, and the Supreme Court judgment is clear. To answer the specific question from my noble friend, we have asked the EHRC to consider costs so that we can have a full consideration of the implications of those costs before a decision is made. However, I will not be tempted into commenting on the contents of the code because of the purdah arrangements that are in place.
My Lords, may I state the obvious? Trans people pose a threat to no one; lawbreakers pose the threat. Having said that, given that trans people represent approximately 0.55% of the population in England according to the 2021 census, can my noble friend the Minister say what assessment the Government have made of the cost to the public purse of adapting facilities across central government departments to comply with the judgment and whether that assessment has been shared with the Treasury?
To ask His Majesty’s Government when they intend to implement the Supreme Court judgement in the For Women Scotland case within Government departments to ensure full compliance with the law.
To ask His Majesty’s Government when they intend to implement the Supreme Court judgement in the For Women Scotland case within Government departments to ensure full compliance with the law.
My Lords, the Supreme Court ruling brings clarity for women and service providers. We expect all duty bearers to follow the law and seek legal advice where necessary, and this includes government departments. Departments have been updating policies following the Supreme Court ruling. Internal Civil Service guidance is also currently under review. We will ensure that any guidance is consistent with the code of practice for services, public functions and associations.
My Lords, the Supreme Court ruling brings clarity for women and service providers. We expect all duty bearers to follow the law and seek legal advice where necessary, and this includes government departments. Departments have been updating policies following the Supreme Court ruling. Internal Civil Service guidance is also currently under review. We will ensure that any guidance is consistent with the code of practice for services, public functions and associations.
My Lords, the Supreme Court ruling brings clarity for women and service providers. We expect all duty bearers to follow the law and seek legal advice where necessary, and this includes government departments. Departments have been updating policies following the Supreme Court ruling. Internal Civil Service guidance is also currently under review. We will ensure that any guidance is consistent with the code of practice for services, public functions and associations.
To ask His Majesty’s Government when they intend to implement the Supreme Court judgement in the For Women Scotland case within Government departments to ensure full compliance with the law.
I understand that the Secretary of State, Bridget Phillipson, has responded positively to the request for a meeting, and I hope that will take place shortly. I have said repeatedly in this House—as a consequence of the repeated questions—that we must get this right. It is too important to not get right. The commission has worked very hard to ensure that all those considerations are taken into account. We now have received that revised code, and it will be placed before Parliament. As my noble friend quite rightly said, we are currently in a pre-election period. This means restrictions, and I am sorry; these restrictions are well established. Given the relevance of the code to the devolved Administrations, we are unable to make any announcements ahead of the elections. Those elections are only a matter of weeks away; as soon as they are out of the way, we will bring forward the code to Parliament.
I understand that the Secretary of State, Bridget Phillipson, has responded positively to the request for a meeting, and I hope that will take place shortly. I have said repeatedly in this House—as a consequence of the repeated questions—that we must get this right. It is too important to not get right. The commission has worked very hard to ensure that all those considerations are taken into account. We now have received that revised code, and it will be placed before Parliament. As my noble friend quite rightly said, we are currently in a pre-election period. This means restrictions, and I am sorry; these restrictions are well established. Given the relevance of the code to the devolved Administrations, we are unable to make any announcements ahead of the elections. Those elections are only a matter of weeks away; as soon as they are out of the way, we will bring forward the code to Parliament.
My Lords, at the third time of asking—I am grateful to my noble friend for his forbearance—I have just two brief questions. Why have Ministers never met any of the leaders of For Women Scotland, whose case ended up in the Supreme Court? One of those, Marion Calder, is sitting in the
Gallery today waiting for an answer of substance, which clearly will not come following the Secretary of State’s Statement. That Statement clearly says that the commission’s advice was received by the Government on 13 April—yesterday. That must mean it was agreed forthwith. We have had all these months of delay and inquiry, but, quite clearly, we have now got to the election purdah. That is what it was all about—to delay the decision until after 7 May—was it not? It is an absolutely disgraceful way to operate.
My Lords, I refer my noble friend to the Written Ministerial Statement issued today by the Minister for Women and Equalities. Under Sections 14(7) and 14(8) of the Equality Act 2006, if the draft code is approved by the Secretary of State, it is laid before Parliament. If neither House disapproves the draft within a 40-day period, the Secretary of State would then bring the code into force by a commencement order.
My Lords, I refer my noble friend to the Written Ministerial Statement issued today by the Minister for Women and Equalities. Under Sections 14(7) and 14(8) of the Equality Act 2006, if the draft code is approved by the Secretary of State, it is laid before Parliament. If neither House disapproves the draft within a 40-day period, the Secretary of State would then bring the code into force by a commencement order.
To ask His Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the merits of implementing the proposed Equality and Human Rights Commission guidance on single sex spaces by means of primary legislation.
Let me repeat what I have said to the noble Baroness on numerous occasions. The Supreme Court decision is absolutely clear, and we will ensure full compliance with it, but that does not mean that existing policies and procedures in place can be simply wiped away. They cover a range of issues, particularly in employment, and it is important that the Civil Service properly reviews those policies. Let me reassure the noble Baroness—I have responded to Written Questions, and I have responded to her before—that we are fully insistent that everyone should comply with the law. That is, and will continue to be, the Government’s position.
Let me repeat what I have said to the noble Baroness on numerous occasions. The Supreme Court decision is absolutely clear, and we will ensure full compliance with it, but that does not mean that existing policies and procedures in place can be simply wiped away. They cover a range of issues, particularly in employment, and it is important that the Civil Service properly reviews those policies. Let me reassure the noble Baroness—I have responded to Written Questions, and I have responded to her before—that we are fully insistent that everyone should comply with the law. That is, and will continue to be, the Government’s position.
My Lords, on 2 February and again on 26 February, the Minister was asked whether government departments are compliant with the Supreme Court ruling on sex. Given that the EHRC code does not cover employment and that the Supreme Court ruling will have existed for a year on Thursday, will the Government take another number of years to comply with the law, or will employees have to relitigate their rights all the way to the Supreme Court again, as the brave women in For Women Scotland did over six years? Will he commit to telling the House when the Government themselves will be compliant with the Supreme Court ruling?
Everybody should comply with the law; that is the Government’s position. Organisations that have any doubt about this should properly consult lawyers. We are absolutely consistent: the Supreme Court judgment is clear and should be applied. I am not deviating from that position.
Everybody should comply with the law; that is the Government’s position. Organisations that have any doubt about this should properly consult lawyers. We are absolutely consistent: the Supreme Court judgment is clear and should be applied. I am not deviating from that position.
My Lords, I draw attention to the fact that it has been a year since the Supreme Court ruling. We have recently had the Olympics say that protecting the female category is based on science. Sport England’s own report said that we cannot have the inclusion of men and fairness in women’s sport. It is not okay to protect 1% and say that 99% of women and girls in this country are not
worthy of fair sport. Will the Minister please tell me why Sport England is still giving money to sports that are breaking the law?
My noble friend will understand that I cannot comment on the contents of the draft code, particularly during this current election period, but I understand the sentiment behind the question. I want to reassure noble Lords that this Government are absolutely committed to balancing all rights and ensuring provision for all. That is what this Government stand for and we will ensure that it happens.
My noble friend will understand that I cannot comment on the contents of the draft code, particularly during this current election period, but I understand the sentiment behind the question. I want to reassure noble Lords that this Government are absolutely committed to balancing all rights and ensuring provision for all. That is what this Government stand for and we will ensure that it happens.
My Lords, I congratulate the Government on taking their time to get this right. I have to say, without any excuse, that they have not been helped by the mess they were given when the Equality and Human Rights Commission proceeded in haste following the Supreme Court judgment. There are obvious legal tensions, not least that which now exists between the judgment and the provisions of the Gender Recognition Act. Therefore, I ask my noble friend the Minister to ensure that the Government will now move forward at pace and, in so doing, maintain their commitment to protect all the vulnerable affected by these issues following the judgment, particularly trans people, including trans women, who have been dehumanised, discriminated against and misrepresented throughout this entire procedure.
I am afraid I have to repeat the point I made: I cannot comment on the draft code during this period of purdah. I think everyone in this House knows the Government’s position. We are absolutely committed to ensuring that the rights of everyone under the Equality Act are, and continue to be, protected. The Supreme Court judgment made that clear too; we should not forget that. We should absolutely remain considerate of the rights of trans people. I am afraid that this debate has been fairly toxic. We need to show a bit of compassion and understanding. I am confident that we can move forward once we have the code before Parliament.
I am afraid I have to repeat the point I made: I cannot comment on the draft code during this period of purdah. I think everyone in this House knows the Government’s position. We are absolutely committed to ensuring that the rights of everyone under the Equality Act are, and continue to be, protected. The Supreme Court judgment made that clear too; we should not forget that. We should absolutely remain considerate of the rights of trans people. I am afraid that this debate has been fairly toxic. We need to show a bit of compassion and understanding. I am confident that we can move forward once we have the code before Parliament.
My Lords, the Government have rightly emphasised that protections for trans people remain in the Equality Act. Can the Minister expand on how the updated code will support service providers in balancing these protections alongside those relating to single-sex spaces?
I understand why the noble Baroness is asking that question, but it has been very important that we listen and respond. The EHRC has done the same. We now have the draft code, as the Written Ministerial Statement says. The Civil Service has been very clear—the noble Baroness knows this better than anyone—that there is a period of purdah, especially as the elections involve bodies directly involved in the application of this code. As soon as the elections are out of the way, we will bring forward the draft code under the Equality Act 2006. She does not have to wait—
I understand why the noble Baroness is asking that question, but it has been very important that we listen and respond. The EHRC has done the same. We now have the draft code, as the Written Ministerial Statement says. The Civil Service has been very clear—the noble Baroness knows this better than anyone—that there is a period of purdah, especially as the elections involve bodies directly involved in the application of this code. As soon as the elections are out of the way, we will bring forward the draft code under the Equality Act 2006. She does not have to wait—
My Lords, despite the love of the Civil Service words of “moving at pace”, many of us have had experience of government acting a little more slowly than we would like. To take a whole year to publish a code of practice is pushing that to the limit. Just because decisions are difficult, it does not
mean they should not be taken. Ministers in both Houses have been dodging our questions for long enough. When—I am asking for a specific date, not another road down which to kick this can—will the Government actually publish the EHRC’s code of practice?
Hang on, I am still standing. I had not quite finished, but I might as well give way to the noble Baroness.
Hang on, I am still standing. I had not quite finished, but I might as well give way to the noble Baroness.
My Lords, despite the love of the Civil Service words of “moving at pace”, many of us have had experience of government acting a little more slowly than we would like. To take a whole year to publish a code of practice is pushing that to the limit. Just because decisions are difficult, it does not
mean they should not be taken. Ministers in both Houses have been dodging our questions for long enough. When—I am asking for a specific date, not another road down which to kick this can—will the Government actually publish the EHRC’s code of practice?
I strongly dispute what the noble Baroness says—I do not suppose we will ever come to an agreement on it—but this is a very important issue. The Supreme Court judgment was absolutely clear; it brought clarity. If anyone is in any doubt about its implementation, they should seek legal advice. The impacts of the code of practice are very broad. I am not going to comment on the code. By the way, purdah is not something invented by the Government. Purdah is a well-established process, and we are not going to deviate from it. We are talking about elections that are only a matter of weeks away. This Parliament will have the opportunity, in accordance with the Equality Act, to review it properly.
I strongly dispute what the noble Baroness says—I do not suppose we will ever come to an agreement on it—but this is a very important issue. The Supreme Court judgment was absolutely clear; it brought clarity. If anyone is in any doubt about its implementation, they should seek legal advice. The impacts of the code of practice are very broad. I am not going to comment on the code. By the way, purdah is not something invented by the Government. Purdah is a well-established process, and we are not going to deviate from it. We are talking about elections that are only a matter of weeks away. This Parliament will have the opportunity, in accordance with the Equality Act, to review it properly.
I am privileged, and almost dumbstruck. I join others in paying tribute to the redoubtable team at the NGO For Women Scotland, who secured this Supreme Court judgment. A Government who proclaim their commitment to the rule of law ad nauseam have spent a year trying to evade it and now continue the gaslighting. The excuse of purdah is rather transparent. Why are the Government so contemptuous of voters, a majority of whom value single-sex facilities and services for women but are not permitted to see this code before 7 May?
To ask His Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the merits of implementing the proposed Equality and Human Rights Commission guidance on single sex spaces by means of primary legislation.
To ask His Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the merits of implementing the proposed Equality and Human Rights Commission guidance on single sex spaces by means of primary legislation.
My Lords, I refer my noble friend to the Written Ministerial Statement issued today by the Minister for Women and Equalities. Under Sections 14(7) and 14(8) of the Equality Act 2006, if the draft code is approved by the Secretary of State, it is laid before Parliament. If neither House disapproves the draft within a 40-day period, the Secretary of State would then bring the code into force by a commencement order.
I agree with the noble Baroness. Until the Life Peerages Act, this House was absolutely full of men, so progress has been made and we should not underestimate that progress. I suspect that after today’s decision, we will make even more progress in due course.
I agree with the noble Baroness. Until the Life Peerages Act, this House was absolutely full of men, so progress has been made and we should not underestimate that progress. I suspect that after today’s decision, we will make even more progress in due course.
My Lords, women make up only 30% of this Chamber. If the Government are serious about having women represented at all levels of decision-making, what actions will they take to enable more women to sit in this Chamber?
The noble Baroness is right. One of the things that is still to be determined is precisely what protected characteristics will be included under Section 106. In the EHRC guidance to political parties was a range of actions that could be taken to ensure diversity, including support for people with disabilities and other actions. We should be very proud that many of the political parties have taken action. We need greater transparency so that we can see what progress has been made.
The noble Baroness is right. One of the things that is still to be determined is precisely what protected characteristics will be included under Section 106. In the EHRC guidance to political parties was a range of actions that could be taken to ensure diversity, including support for people with disabilities and other actions. We should be very proud that many of the political parties have taken action. We need greater transparency so that we can see what progress has been made.
My Lords, the implementation of Section 106 is going to help a great deal, whenever it comes. As well as this, is there some way that there could be a recommendation that all parties report that they have considered prioritising gender equality in their selection criteria?