Holyrood had no choice but to follow law on trans toilet ban

In response, the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) advised public bodies to review policies relating to single-sex spaces.
That prompted parliament to redesignate several existing toilets and changing rooms as gender-neutral, and restrict single-sex facilities to sex.
READ MORE
Scottish Green co-convenor Patrick Harvie raised the matter during questions to the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Bureau (SPCB), the cross-party group responsible for the running of Holyrood.
He accused the SPCB of promoting an 'exclusionary and segregating' policy and said the decision made the body's stated intention 'that everyone should feel welcome and included at Holyrood' appear 'nonsense'.
Mr Harvie cited letters from the Equality Network and Scottish Trans, which warned that the change would make trans people feel significantly less welcome at the Parliament.
'They go on to say we cannot understand why this decision has been described as one that will bring confidence, privacy and dignity to everyone. It will not do so for trans people. It will exclude us and segregate us in the heart of Scotland's democracy,' he said.
He added that concerns raised by staff in the Scottish Greens' parliamentary group — including the negative impact on trans and gender non-conforming people and the 'violation of privacy and dignity' — had not been addressed.
Patrick Harvie raised the ban in SPCB questions (Image: PA) Scottish Conservative MSP Jackson Carlaw, speaking on behalf of the SPCB, said the ruling had 'immediate legal effect' and that the corporate body had a legal obligation to act without delay.
"The corporate body is an executive body with legal responsibilities and the personal liability of the members who sit on it. Our job, even though we are politicians, is not to debate the politics of an issue, but to ensure that we are implementing the law as the law is communicated to us."
He added: 'It is our responsibility to fulfil the legal obligations as an employer, service provider, workplace provider, and as an organisation subject to the public sector equality duty."
Pressed by Mr Harvie, he said the interim position was taken on legal advice and that a broader consultation — including with trade unions and equality organisations — had now been approved.
'We announced the interim stance. We agreed to conduct a consultation, and together with officials the corporate body has been considering its approach,' he said.
Labour MSP Mercedes Villalba told the chamber that Parliament staff unions had not been consulted and described assurances to the contrary as 'categorically untrue'. She called for 'meaningful consultation' going forward.
READ MORE
Tory MSP Pam Gosal welcomed the SPCB's actions, pointing to warnings from the campaign group Sex Matters that legal challenges could follow if public bodies fail to comply with the court's interpretation.
'Sex Matters have warned that they will come after organisations refusing to follow the ruling — that will once again leave the taxpayers footing the bill,' she said. 'Therefore, will the Parliament commit to implementing the interim update issued by the EHRC on the protection of single-sex spaces?'
Mr Carlaw reiterated that the SPCB had acted 'on the advice that we receive' and would continue to prioritise inclusion through its upcoming Inclusive Parliament Review.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Times

an hour ago

• Times

Findlay gives first minister the Victor Meldrew treatment

People often find it hard to believe that Richard Wilson was just 53 when he took on the role of Victor Meldrew in One Foot in the Grave. Indeed, he was at first reluctant to take on the part because he did not consider himself remotely old enough to do it justice. Coincidentally, Russell Findlay is the same age as Wilson was when he first played Britain's favourite permanently-exasperated pensioner. Like Victor, the leader of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party brings a heavy 'I don't believe it' vibe to the Holyrood chamber. It is one of his most endearing qualities. Each week, one wonders what will set him off next. It could be anything, frankly. For — and there is no point in fannying about here — this is a target-rich environment. This week, it was new guidance issued to teachers on how they might henceforth deal with monstrously disruptive pupils. This, Findlay said, was 'exactly what you might expect from this ineffective government: 49 pages of tedious, hand-wringing nonsense'. We were asked to believe that he deplores this but we all know that secretly Findlay loves it. The Tory leader is an Eeyore, never happier than when things are falling apart. What, he wanted to know, is the first minister going to do about Scotland's burgeoning population of scrotes and nyaffs? Shouldn't he recognise that 'a tougher approach' to school discipline was required — the pillory, perhaps — rather than 'laminated cards and inclusive chats'? Do teachers need endless checklists and decision-making flowcharts and all the rest of the all-nonsense approach favoured by this hopelessly woke government? Isn't it time to get back to basics? Well, the first minister said, 'it's always my priority to listen to the teaching profession.' And this, you may think, could explain many of the problems long so evident in Scottish education. The politicians are listening to all the wrong people. Moreover, Swinney added, 'if young people are unable to participate in their education they are unlikely to go on to good outcomes' and although exclusions must be part of the process, 'exclusions can have negative consequences for young people'. Doubtless this is true, though unfortunately this did not address the salient point made by Findlay. Namely that 'a small minority of pupils prevent the majority from learning'. Perhaps this explains why there were nearly 12,000 exclusions in 2022-23. Admittedly, the first minister said, this was fewer than had been the case in 2018-19. No one could quite agree if this was an impressively high number or a deplorably low one and consequently whether the falling number of exclusions was a good or a bad thing. Still, the consequence of excluding children from school would be to let them loose on Scotland's streets, Swinney said — where they would doubtless run amok and provide Findlay with something else about which to complain. Heads the government loses and tails the opposition wins. Quite so; those, after all, are the rules and this is one rare area in which we may expect the rules to be followed.

ITV News

an hour ago

• ITV News

Assisted dying bill passes in parliament after MPs vote in favour

MPs have voted in favour of the assisted dying bill which will legalise the right for terminally ill people in England and Wales to end their own life with medical assistance. In a historic vote, MPs voted 314 to 219 in favour of the bill, backing the right for adults with less than six months to live to choose to end their own lives. MPs began voting on the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, brought forward by Labour backbencher Kim Leadbeater, just after 2pm on Friday as opposition and pro-change campaigners gathered outside Parliament. It came after an often highly emotional debate in the Commons with MPs from across the political divide making impassioned arguments for and against. Friday's vote does not mean the bill immediately becomes law as it will now transfer to the House of Lords for further scrutiny. The upper chamber can make amendments to the bill and pass it back to MPs but it is expected this process will happen fairly quickly as the final date they can currently consider a Private Members' Bill in this parliamentary session is July 11. There are several more stages of scrutiny in both chambers for the bill to go through before it heads to the King to receive royal assent and become law. Even with all of these processes it could still be another four years before the first person in the UK is able to legally make use of assisted dying services as the bill allows this time for the government to work out how it is implemented. Under Leadbeater's bill, for a person to be eligible, they must be over the age of 18 and have the mental capacity to make the choice. When MPs lasted voted on this bill it stipulated those seeking to end their life must have the decision signed off by at least two doctors and a High Court judge. MPs have since dropped this final requirement in favour of an "expert panel" which includes a lawyer, a psychiatrist and a social worker. This move has divided some with some viewing it as an improvement and others seeing it as less substantial. Assisted dying is currently banned in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, with a maximum prison sentence of 14 years. The last time MPs voted on the issue in 2015, the bill was defeated by 330 votes to 118, but the composition of the Commons has significantly changed since then following this year's general election with more Labour MPs sitting. A total of 605 out of 650 MPs voted on this bill last time. It was a free vote, meaning the government's position on this was officially neutral. The voting came slightly later in the day as MPs finished voting on amendments they ran out of time for in the previous debate. MPs voted to reject an amendment making people ineligible for assisted dying if their wish to end their life was motivated by not wanting to be a burden, a mental disorder, a disability, financial considerations, a lack of access to care, or suicidal ideation. An amendment to close a loophole allowing someone to seek assisted dying as a result of voluntarily stopping eating enjoyed wide support and was passed without a vote. MPs rejected a vote removing the "presumption of capacity," which would have required people seeking to end their life to first prove they had the mental capacity to do so. Parliament voted against a technical amendment seeking to prevent the government from being able to alter the founding purposes of the NHS and in favour of amendments clarifying where parts of this bill will take effect as well as a commitment for the government to publish a review of palliative care in one year. This matter is a devolved issue for the UK and Friday's main vote will only affect England and Wales.

Western Telegraph

2 hours ago

• Western Telegraph

Campaigners for and against assisted dying make feelings known at Westminster

Dame Prue Leith, Dame Esther Rantzen's daughter, Rebecca Wilcox, and the broadcaster, Jonathan Dimbleby, were among the high-profile figures supporting the Bill to change the law in England and Wales. Members of the Dignity in Dying campaign wore pink and held placards in memory of friends and family members. Those opposed to the Bill included groups dressed as scientists in white lab coats and bloodied gloves and masks, as well as nuns and other members of religious organisations. The mood amongst campaigners was largely calm and respectful on both sides. Dame Prue told the PA news agency she was 'both nervous and confident' about the outcome. 'It's so moving to see all these people with placards of people they've lost or people who are dying of cancer,' she said. 'It's hard not to cry because I think they have done such a good job. Let's hope we've won.' Dame Esther Rantzen's daughter, Rebecca Wilcox, supporting the Dignity in Dying protest outside Parliament (Yui Mok/PA) Mr Dimbleby said he believed the Bill would be 'transformative'. He added: 'What it will mean is millions of people will be able to say to themselves, 'If I'm terminally ill, I will be able to choose, assuming I am of sound mind and I am not being coerced, to say 'Yes, I want to be assisted – I have dignity in death'.' Rebecca Wilcox, the daughter of Dame Esther, said: 'It couldn't be a kinder, more compassionate Bill that respects choice at the end of life, that respects kindness and empathy and gives us all an option when other options, every other option, has been taken away, and it would just be the perfect tool for a palliative care doctor to have in their med bag.' Teachers Catie and Becky Fenner said they wanted other families to benefit from the Bill. Campaigners against the assisted dying Bill outside Parliament (Yui Mok/PA) Their mother, who had motor neurone disease, had flown to Dignitas in Switzerland to end her life at a cost of £15,000. The sisters said they did not get to properly say goodbye and grieve and worried about the legal repercussions. Catie, 37, said: 'We were left quite traumatised by the whole experience – not only seeing a parent go through a really horrible disease but then the secrecy of the planning.' Campaigners against the Bill, who were gathered outside Parliament, chanted 'We are not dead yet' and 'Kill the Bill, not the ill'. A display was erected with a gravestone reading 'RIP: The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill. Bury it deep', and behind were two mounds meant to resemble graves. Andrew Hilliard, 75, said he was opposed for religious reasons. He was dressed in a white lab coat with a placard reading: 'Protect our NHS from becoming the National Suicide Service'. The chief executive of Care Not Killing, Dr Gordon Macdonald, said MPs should prioritise improving palliative care. He said: 'Most people, when thinking about the practical implications of this, for those most vulnerable, they change their minds.' George Fielding, a campaigner affiliated with the Not Dead Yet group which is opposed to assisted dying, said he attended to represent disabled people. He said: 'This Bill will endanger and shorten the lives of disabled people.'