Thread by @tribunaltweets

Good morning. We will be live tweeting a Westminster Hall debate later today at 4.30pm. The debate will consider two petitions relating to the definition of “sex” in the Equality Act 2010.

Our followers will know that the Equality Act 2010 is commonly engaged in many of the legal cases we have covered as are issues relating to sex and gender.

The House of Commons Library have produced a debate pack setting out the key issues surrounding the debate that you can read here: researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CDP-…

The debate will also be live-streamed here: parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/60…

As usual, we will be tweeting in real-time to provide a sense of proceedings for those who cannot attend the debate and no reliance should be placed upon our tweets. A full transcript of the debate will be in Hansard in due course.

We’ll be back at 4.30pm.

It's 16:28 and we are waiting for the livestream to start. Here's a link. parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/60…

We have begun. Discussion from that the subject of the petition is in the Scottish courts.
Toni Antonazzzzi TA opening the debate.

TA - two petitions; one to amend, one to leave Equality Act unamended re the definition of sex.
Many have told me that they are relieved, are scared to talk about it.
Interrupted by another member - please be compassionate because many people are distressed

by the very discussion of this topic.
(NB - it will be difficult to identify those who interject, apologies)
TA - I think the member will see my compassion in my speech. We are legislators, we need to be able to talk about difficult subjects.

TA - I have been in education for 20 years. I learn the most when having open discussions and listening. With my constituents who are gay, lesbian, bi or trans.
Our task is to make decisions on the boundary of rights. Our responsibility is to make a decision on the right law

to have now.
TA - I have met with both sets of petitioners, thank you for your time. There is a debate pack from the library.
Those petitioning to amend the definition; are seeking single sex spaces and services.
TA - I also spoke with representatives of lesbian groups.

TA - Those lesbians said that biology is fundamental to same sex attraction. If sex is not clarified, then the same sex protections are effectively null and void.
Now discussing the research about being a lesbian and the current climate, and is a barrier to coming out.

TA - do women have the right to single sex spaces or not?
TA - I also spoke with those supporting the other position and they assert that many transpeople are already using the services of the opposite sex.
ORDER ORDER
Suspended for 15 minutes for 2 divisions in the house.

Catching up slightly.
TA - It will be distressing to transpeople to be forced back into the spaces for their natal sex when they have been using opposite sex services. Problems rarely occur with trans people using opposite sex services and those can be dealt with

on a case by case basis. Many say 'transwomen are women and transmen are men'.
This is point at which she was interrupted by the order call as MPs were summoned to vote.
We will resume when they are back.

MPs who are expected to speak (this will save time when they begin speaking) May be incomplete.
RJ - Ranil Jayawardena (Conservative)
JC - Joanna Cherry (SNP)
RD- Rosie Duffield (Labour)
NF- Nick Fletcher (Conservative)
PB - Sir Peter Bottomley (Conservative)

JP- Jess Phillips (Labour)
MC - Miriam Cates (Conservative)
JDP - Jackie Doyle Price (Conservative)
MC - Marsha de Cordova (Labour)
NH- Neale Hanvey (Alba)
SM - Steve McCabe (Labour)

DJ - Diana Johnson (Labour)
RM - Robin Millar (Conservative)
TL - Tim Loughton (Conservative)
AF - Anna Firth (Conservative)
AR - Angela Richardson (Conservative)
CA - Caroline Ansel (Conservative)
AL - Andrew Lewer (Conservative)
EC - Elliot Colborn (Conservative)

KO - Kate Osborne (Labour)
SD - Stephen Doughty (Labour)
TO - Taiwo Owatemi (Labour)
BB - Ben Bradshaw (Labour)
CN - Caroline Nokes (Conservative)
AK - Alicia Kearns (Conservative)
AQ - Anum Qasar (SNP)
JW - Jamie Wallis (Conservative)

These MPs have indicated they wish to speak with regard to one or both of the petitions being considered. They may or may not choose to speak.

The MPs are returning to the committee room following the divisions. We can expect proceedings to resume fairly soon.
On behalf of Tribunal Tweets - live tweeting prepared remarks is very difficult as there are few pauses. We may be less comprehensive than usual.

Order order sitting is resuming. TA resumes.
TA - some of those arguing for no change say TWAW and TWAM. Some feel this petition is an attack on transpeople. Reading out a letter from Nancy Kelly. Proud of the Eq Act. Also from RMW - this is a blunt instrument.

Input from another stakeholder - need a less toxic debate.
Service providers - we badly need clarity about the law.
Many people - the law is fine.
TA - I spoke to the EHRC, and they said 'a change to make sex biological sex could clarify the law'

Also EHRC - we need to move the public debate on to a more informed basis.
Now referring to the proposals to reform the GRA in Scotland.
Interrupted by Lloyd Russel-Moyle.
GRA reform contemplated self id.
TA - I can't say. Returning to remarks.

TA - I'm talking about a way forward. Akua Reindorf - we need some shared facts to move forward. Baroness Kishner said she provided advice, don't shoot the messenger.
TA - one petitioner said 'we want the Tory government to stop using us as a distraction from their failure'

....the main challenge trans people face is getting care to transition'.
TA - now referring to Maya Forstater's input that protections for sex and for gender ID are different things.
Proud to open debate.

JR - a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship. The debate on women's rights too important to be left to social media. I'm a father of two daughters. We need to legislate. The point is one of law but it is widely felt. I want the rules of our society to safe, clear and fair.

JR- some schools not maintaining single sex sport, single sex toilets, single sex changing rooms. Now on to the NHS - one trust is refusing to guarantee same sex care for intimate care, despite having a number of alleged sexual assaults.

JR - if the law is ambiguous about the meaning of sex, I want a return to plain language - the word for those born male are men and boys, the word for those born female are women and girls. It is not possible to change sex. I have been told it is brave to say that these days.

JR - I don't want anyone to be restricted from living their lives as they wish. The petition asks for clarification that for the avoidance of doubt, that sex means sex not gender identity. A GRC does not make a man a woman or vice versa. Quoting Thomas Cook 1597 -

The law cannot do the impossible. The amendment does not take away anyone's rights to live as they wish.
Interruption Layla Moran - does the member know that intersex people exist?
JR - you may address in your remarks. I urge the government now to protect the rights of women

JC - Joanna Cherry (SNP).
Supporting clarification of Eq Act. My constituency had the highest number of signatures of the petition, likewise next 4 also in Scotland, people are concerned.
I'm supporting clarification of the law, it does no one good to leave the law a muddle

The protections of EqAct for gender reassignment are broad. And the clarification will not change those.
Sex is the most important of the protected characteristics to the most people.
It is possible to be pro-women and not anti-anyone else.
I want to spend my time talking

about same sex attraction. Lesbians are same sex attracted not same gender identity attracted. As a lesbian, I feel I speak with some authority.
The widening of the definition by Stonewall to include gender and even cross dressers has made it impossible for lesbians to gather

It is time that lesbians regain the voice that they once had, and I'm proud to be that voice. Thanked various parties LGBA,
MC - when the EqAct was passed no one doubted that sex meant biological sex. Where we are now - many believe that once someone has expressed a desire

to live as the opposite sex they have all of the rights and privileges of that sex.
Now describing a tribunal where a man, self id into a woman's changing room in a hospital trust and the trust lost the case because the judge treated the man as if he was a woman.

It is extraordinary that the most contentious question of our time is 'what is a woman'? Despite the efforts of some to avoid the question, we all know the answer. We instinctively know the difference. There is nothing more destabilising to society to undermine the protection

of women and children. We must clarify the Eq Act as sex means sex.
Interruption.
MC - the vast majority of assault happens by men on women.

Angela Eagle speaking - to retain EA 2010 unchanged,

AE: Last contribution not helpful - toxic debate.
AE: Not sure that any law can govern anyone's sexual attraction or dating pool.

AE: 7000 people have a gender recognition certificate, those are the people that the amendment would affect. But *all* trans people would also be affected, exclusion.

AE: This "war on woke" has already led to increased harassment of non-confirming people in public spaces.

AE: Have always fought for women's rights and I'm also a lesbian, first out lesbian minister. This is a discredited government unleashing culture war to hide its own failures.

AE: In the USA over 400 anti-LGBTQ+ bills this year. Creating homophobian. I was around for Section 28, drove young LGBTQ+ people into hiding, ruined their lives.

AE: The EA2010 works very well. Blanket assumption againsts all discrimination - then some allowances if proportionate means to legitimate aim. Transphobia is inhumane and indefensible.

Angela Richardson now for the first petition.
AR: Trans rights are human rights and women's rights are human rights. We are here today to discuss how to get that right. Much sympathy for those with protected characteristic of gender reassignment.

AR: GR and sex are two separate protected characteritisc. Census suggests maybe 100K people identify as transgender - but only about 7K have GRC. EA2010 protects them all - GRC doesn't matter, "passing" doesn't matter.

AR: Service providers need to be able to develop policies and rules that protect everyone and serve everyone, and need to be able to make them clear to staff, customers, and to have clear signage.

AR: Cannot be right that some trans people - with GRC - get treated differently from others.

AR: We are typically seeing many unisex spaces (and btw it's not OK to just convert the ladies!)
Gender reassigment - people have issues and problems EA2010 protects. But so do those with PC of sex.

Jess Phillips now.
JP: Status quo really isn't working.
JP: Sex and gender are different. Have never met a trans person that doesn't agree. Discrimination I have suffered from orgs has always been re my sex. Particularly in pregnancy.

JP: My remarks are going to be about single sex spaces and safety of women. I have direct experience running these.

JP: Violence against women and girls exists. Of course men can be victims too, and need services to help. But one-size-fit-all doesn't work. Women are much more often victims. EA2010 allows for specific services.

JP: Am seeing over and again women-only services are being decommissioned in favour of generic ones. This is devastating. Will be raising in HoC tomorrow also. Govt refused to use "women" in Domestic Abuse Bill, Online Harms Bill.

JP: Services are terrified of losing funding for women's services. We cannot leave this to the courts. Has happened to my organisation - we refused to interview a man for a job.

JP: When commissioning for Birmingham council, I ensured specialist services for LGBT people, for South Asian women. Specialist. And women should have those too.

Peter Bottomley now.
PB: Thank you for informative speakers especially JP,
PB: Want to thank Helen Joyce and Kathleen [he said Helen] Stock for their books which taught me a lot. Neither contains a single sentence that is transphobic.

PB: Patron of "Ditch the label" charity - it's anti-bullying - was involved with the bullying of Kathleen Stock's book. KS recommends "better activism" - especially re requirement for good data.

PB: Census 2021 included Q on gender reassignment for first time - but so badly worded that it appears to have been useful.

PB: It is not transphobic to say that when sex and gender clash, sex should matter. Consider a man winning a women's cycling race. It is simply wrong. And: in hospitals and prisons, the expectation of single sex should mean exactly that.

PB: Hope this debate will make it clear that parliament is taking this issue seriously.

Now Rosie Duffield.
RD: Debate has become toxic precisely *because* the law is not clear enough. The spite and vitriol, trolling, defamation that I and other women experience is terrible.

RD: Women need protection in law. Transwomen need protection in law. But these are not the same groups. And the EA2010 carefully recognised that. Protects against gender reassigment and sex - separately. Because they are not the same.

RD: Women and men experience differences in violence, in caring responsibility, in single parenthood, in workplace status. Women need sex discsrimination law.

RD: Have had so many women (and some men) write to thank me for what I say over this; and that they are afraid to speak up themselves. People working in schools, hospitals. Women working in refuges afraid of being sued. Women athletes afraid to complain.

RD: This is not the world the EA2010 set out to create.

RD: EA2010 also of course set out to protect trans people. But it did not intend to state there was no difference between them and others of their sex.

RD: The Gender Recognition Act allowed people to change their sex for the purposes of marriage etc - it did not intend to say people could swtich categories for all purposes.

[New speaker - missed name. Will call him X]

X: I worked in construction much of my life - health and safety much improved over my career. Much of it is preventative - considering possiblities, learning from near misses.

X: So our building sites are getting safer and safer.

X: But our single sex spaces are getting less safe.

X: Does not mean every man is a danger - just that some are. And so we have preventative rules. And should.

X: Also want to talk about sports. Girls will look at men winning all events and will lose interest.
X: We of course need to support and respect ppl with gender dysphoria. But not at the expense of others.

X: We have to think of the six year old girl faced with a 50 year old man in her changing room, or the 9 year old girl giving up on hope of Olympic competition.

X: And the girl sold a lie who ends up in her early 20s damaged by drugs, probably with damaged family relationships.

[Missed another name - sorry. Will call her Y]
Y: Decisions about refuge services should be taken by the services. About sports, by the sporting bodies, Rugby is different from chess.

Y: EA2010 already allows "proportionate means to legitimate aim". Change proposed would bar transppl from services they use without problems and have for years.

Y: We have had GRA2004 nearly 20 years, most of us have probably not even noticed the TW in our ladies loos. This debate has conflated TW with criminals. Not right. Some police officers are criminals, but not all are.

Y: Anybody can dress up as a woman to commit a crime but we should not say that has anything to do with TW.
Y: Transppl find all this very hurtful.

[Mhairi Black intervenes to praise previous speaker]
MB: Does she agree T people enhance lesbian and gay lives?
Y: indeed.

[New speaker, call him Z]
Z: There are cases where the basic binary of sex really matters. Ppl can identify however they like, but not when that injures others - and that injuring is happening now.

Z: Consider a woman having a gynaelogical procedure. Say a smear, or a vaginal/uterine internal exam. She will be naked from the waist down. Perhaps she is the victim of sexual assault, or has religious views - or just her own boundaries.

Z: And she wants this procedure to be done only by a woman. We have to ask: would it then be OK for a man who identifies as a woman to do it?

Z: The NHS says yes.

Z: The NHS Confederation produced a report saying exactly this, last week. That the man's identity overrides the patient's desire for a same sex practitioner.

JC: Does he agree with me that that gudiance is simply wrong in law?
Z: Yes indeed. and that is why clarity is needed.

Z: Guidance even says that patient has no right to even know the sex of the practitioner. This is illegal; if the NHS sends that man, it would be sexual assault.

[Now Luke Pollard]
LP: We need calm and cool debate. Transmen are men, transwomen are women, non binary identifies are valid.
LP: Change proposed is unworkable, unfair.

LP: Saying sex = sex assigned at birth would mean intrusive medical exams, and would not reflect lives people live today. And what about intersex people? This would be a rollback of rights and enable discrimination v transppl. Want to hear more trans voices.

LP: We are talking about trans toilets, should be talking about trans healthcare. Waiting lists v long. 7 years in SW.

LP: Talking of transppl as if predators causes hate v transppl. I know a butch lesbian who is often asked to leave ladies loos.

LP [ refuses a couple of interventions ]
LP: All the special cases discussed today are already covered in the EA2010

LP: Right of transppl to live and thrive is not up for debate. We must not go the way of the USA. Where first they came for transppl then for the rest of the LGBTQ+ people. Direction of travel.

LP: For transppl watching - they should be loved, they should be seen, should be protected in law. There are non binary women and non binary men. Oh, and non binary folks.

[Now Tim Loughton]
TL: Extraordinary that we even have to have this debate - and that people have tried even to discourage it. Conflation of sex and gender has been the problem. It is vital to have the debate.

TL: There *is* lack of clarity, and we can see problems caused by this in so many places. This is a clarification, not a change. And does not at all remove gender reassignment protections. Clarity needed for schools, hospitals, charities, everyone.

TL: In particular we need to clarify re women's sport. London 2012 Olympics were fab. But since then, about 60 governing bodies opened up women's category to men. Including even combat sport eg judo.

TL: Women's sport must be about excellence in women's achievements. We *know* men are bigger, stronger and faster than women. EG athletics - women's world records beaten by teenage boys.

TL: Sport orgs are worried about being sued - even if law on their side, vexatious litigation. And worried about the outside-events stuff - changing rooms etc. Issue for all levels of sport, not just elite level.

TL: Mention work of Fair Play For Women.
TL: Some women eg religion *require* single sex provision even to take part.
TL: It is simply not fair on women and girls to have this situation.

[Lloyd Russel Moyle now]
LRM: We need calm debate. Lots of people told lies about me last time this got discussed. Hate etc targeted at *all* sides of this debate.

LRM: Today we've heard lots of cherry picked examples. But these will have been complex cases, should have had nuanced address. Sex is not simple.

[An intervener talks of karyotype variations eg XXY]

LRM: So the law needs flexibility, should stay as it stands. Not everybody lives in simple binary world. EA2010 already allows some discrimination to exist. On gender - I mean sex. And on others. But need flexibility, case by case.

LRM: Survivors Network in my constituency has been TW-inclusive for over 30 years. Because that was local need. Other providers don't. Both are legal, which is as it should be.

LRM: This change would stop SN being inclusive. And would stop transmen going into men's spaces.
LRM: We have a new pool locally - all facilities one-person only etc.

JP: [intervenes] unisex all very well, and, yes great, but many women would much prefer if single-sex existed *alongside* as well.

[There is another 15 minute break, for a division in the House of Commons]

[We resume]
Chair: We will extend this debate to 8.09pm

LRM: I want flexibility for local services. Government should issue workable guidelines. Tragedy would be a woman turned away from a refuge and sent to an ex prisoners hostel with rapists. What we need is adequate services.

[Now Jonathan Gorringe [?spelling]
JG: nobody is looking for a culture war. Both women and the trans community deserve protection. And there are plenty of such laws in place eg EA2010

JG: But if we are asked to clarify the law, we should seriously consider doing so. I have a woman relative who fled rape and violence in a relationship, for a women's refuge. Thank you JP for her clear and compassionate statement on these.

JG: In 21st century we should not be pretending that science doesn't matter and facts are disposable.
JG: It is befuddling to so many people that this debate is even needed because it is so obvious the EA2010 sex means sex.

JG: Want my daughters to look up to those like Rosie Duffield, JK Rowling, who have stood up for what they think is right. They have received just as much abuse as any member of the trans community.

JG: Appalling that JKRowling got such vicious attacks from some of the actors she had worked with.
JG: We should not need to be having this debate.

[Z intervenes] Sex means as modified by GRC?
JG: No. Sex is not assigned at birth - it is a fact.
JG: BTW re XXY karyoptype - that is Klinefelter syndrome; it does not affect the man's sex which is male of course.

JG: We appear to be living in a society that is abandoning fact and science and truth.

[Another MP will call him A]
A: Worked in health service for many years. It is shocking to me that NHS should be proposing to lie to patients. We have to find a way to accommodate everyone.

A: Principle of equality - Aristotle - that equals must be treated equally, unequals unequally (meaning adjustments may be needed). We have to allow for our differences and sex is one of the most major of those.

A: If "sex" is to mean anything other than actual sex then my sexual orientation as a gay man becomes meaningless.
A: Was asked if TWAW. Puzzled because it made not sense, subverted the meaning of "woman".

A: Identifying a TW as a TW is essential to protecting that person in law. Anything other than W=W, M=M, TW=TW is a chaotic world where nobody knows where they stand. Children should not be told this nonsense. Law must be able to accurately describe *everyone*

[Now Peter Gibson]
PG: Trans people matter to me as member of LGBT community, and to my family, and as constituents.
PG: This debate creates strong feelings on all sides and we here must be careful not to inflame.

PG: I speak in favour of status quo peition. EA2010 is carefully crafted. EHRC letter said change could clarify some matters - but ambiguity in others. We should always consider clarification carefully - but am concerned this change would exclude transppl from EA protections.

PG: Could end up with unintended consequences eg transppl who pass treated differently in law from those who don't. Or non-conforming people affected. Transppl most marginalised communities.

PG: This proposal is not a clarification it's a change.
PG: GRA2004 says person is legal sex for *all* purposes. Transppl can already be excluded from single sex if PMTOLA.

PG: Worried the change wd just make it easier to discriminate v transppl. Only a few 100 GRCs issued in a year. Everyone in UK shd be able to live life & fulfil potential, transppl should be able to prosper. We must not turn back progress.

[Kirsty Blackman now]
KB: Want to repeat re Luke Pollard, trans ppl are valid.
KB: Want to reject rhetoric in this room where transppl potential predators. Some yes. But not whole group.
KB: Also reject "ordinary ppl" meaning non-trans. Lots of transppl think they are ordinary!

KB: I am a straight woman and I get very frustrated when ppl on social media say I should butt out.
KB: What is biological sex? Not defined. I don't know my chromosomes. They are probably XY [sic]. If we were to change this we'd need proper defintiion.

KB: Society is failing transppl. Also failing women. But here we are discussing transppl, will lead to more hate. ppl are gatekept from toilets, attacked for how they present.

KB: Have a constituent who said I just want to go shopping and go to the loo. Have heard girls saying they can't use the loo because they have short hair.

KB: Have had a constituent ask if should kill self bcs of this proposal. Said they won't stop until we are out of public life. Demonised.

[Another MP - will call her B]
B: Chair warned us there are 2 live court cases around this and to avoid contempt of court. So individuals are having - [my connection is jumpy - sorry]

B: Forced to run gauntlet of the courts - case by case - sometimes great personal cost, to career / reputation / health.
B: So I support that law shjould be clarified - it's not a change, clarified.
B: Previous speaker effectively agreed with this. Transppl need clarity too.

B: The confusion we see all around us shows clarification is needed. Petitioner Maya Forstater had a many-years legal fight to show her beliefs covered by EA. But all over the country and in every sector people still struggle to have this.

B: Worker at Oxfam "Maria" driven out just for asking why JKR called transphobic.
B: And I saw in horror - am local - Kathleen Stock harassed at Sussex, and the rape victim having to sue to get women-only services.

B: It should not be left to the courts - shd be up to parliament. And courts can only rule on case in front of them.
B: We have five year olds being told to consider are they in the wrong body - and their parents scared to speak.
B: We need this clarity.

Anna Firth MP (will call AF): I support first petition for many reasons but will focus on single sex spaces and services. I believe that transpeople must play full part in society and we must be careful not to stoke hatred

This is not about Transpeople. Their rights remain unchanged. we need to clarify whether they are included in single sex spaces - are they their own sex or the opposite sex?

Clarity would make it clear that male people don't have the right to women's sports, spaces or to perform intimate care. Women want to know that a sign saying female means female. Transpeople and NB people who are male sjould not be in these spaces.

We know it's important to clarify the law because there are already exceptions in the equality act. We must be clear that sex mean bio sex and that someone born female is female and someone born male is male. They are not the same and males should not be accessing

women's services. If the EA isn't clarified it is impossible for services to exclude a bio male from women's spaces etc. Case by case doesn't work - it pushes the responsibilities onto providers

as to who should have access. One eg the NHS promises single-sex wards but the annex B policytells hospitals to allow trans and NBs to choose where they will be accommodated

It's said sporting bodies set sex-based rules so clarification isns't need. I disagree - the law must be clarified. I was horrified about the story about boxer Fallon Fox fighting against Tamika Brent who ended up with 2 staples to her head. It was a man fighting a woman

Kirstin Oswald: First the tone has been mixed today. Some of the language hasn't been measured. The tone all too often is unedifying. The people who lose out most are the people directly impacted by the issue. Confusion will be the result of this. The outcome of the change

Is unlike to make people's lives better and confusion will increase to the detriment of transpeople as well as potentially to women. People keep saying it's not a change in law. I say it is. I am a feminist and I am fed up that women still don't have the rights that we should

So let's talk about it more - talk about buffer zones, rights at work. Obvs this debate isn't in that category. My rights aren't affected by others having rights. Women are under threat by men. I grew up in the 80s, there were no LGB people in school. Or we didn't know about them

I worry that this debate today is very similar in tone to that of the 80s. The amendment would not benefit transpeople in any way. The Scot Gov needs to be consulted re any changes. The EHRC has shifted it's stance without basing it on any meaningful consultation or evidence

The heat in this debate has only just appeared. It's reminiscent of the culture wars in the US. There is a lack of clarity - where do you go to the loo? How do you deal with it? There is the issue of intersex people. Sometimes people don't have the usual sex characteristics of

their sex. Some women don't ovulate - I am one of them. There is much work to do. We need to consider that some work by eg Engender - they point to evidence that changing the EA will limit the protections for all women and will exclude transpeople. A paper called on the basis of

sex was commissioned which concludes that the EA use of non-restrictive definitions is a strength. The concern is that there is no legal precedent for the def of biological sex. Transpeople shouldn't expect to be treated as a political football or have their identities questioned

Let's not have that here. All of us are here with good will and we should be respectful. This is a small group of the most marginalised and vulnerable people - all of our rights matter.

Annaliese Dodds: It's clear from the 2 petitions that there are strong views on this. It's vital we set an example on these matters. It's important, many are seeking clarity from the Con Govt about the EA. It's 13 years since the EA was introduced. There's confusion about Govt's

position on this. The PM backs the protections for women. We can't understand the Govt's intentions when the PM supports the EA one day and attacks it the next. Labout remains committed to upholding the EA inc the single sex exceptions. The overwhelming no of the people is in

favour of the EA. Labour supports transpeople and single sex services for women. This has been in place for over 10 years and it provides a robust framework. The EA protects everyone - clarity is important - for when transpeople can be included and when they cannot.

The EHRC made clear that changes to the EA could bring clarity to some areas and confusion to others. What future changes are being planned - does the Govt agree with the EHRC re confusion. Will the minister confirm whether the Govt will respond to the EHRC. We've seen engagement

on issues like this one but we haven't seen the same level of engagement when so many women got poorer and poorer, while maternal mortality rate rose and while women and girls have become more unsafe

Maria Caulfield: We should be able to debate these issues without being attacked. On all sides we have been able to do that this afternoon. The EA is at the heart of this. Over time we need to look at it's purpose and relevance. Our law has to be functional.

It's important to recognise that there are times when protections interact - giving rise to discussion on how all are to be protected. In the EA sex refers to men and women in law. [Joanna Cherry: sex has long been recognised in the law. We're not seeking to define what sex is]

If sex means sex in law - this would include transwomen with a GRC not those who don't. Should that basis need changing to ensure bio women are protected. The EHRC was asked for it's advice because of concerns that the EA is not sufficiently clear in the balance it strikes. It's

in everyone's interests to clarify the law. The PM said that the issue of bio sex is fundamentally important - for women's sports and spaces. The EHRC state that redefining sex in the EA would simplify and clarify things. We need to look at the potential effects

There are many views on this issue and we need to take time to look at it. It's clear that people are struggling with the act as it is. [interventions bring up the 2 UN rapporteurs' conflicting views). Re single sex spaces - the govt is committed to retaining single sex spaces.

We are committed to protecting all people against discrimination. The legal position is not changed in the law - the EA says service providers CAN restrict services to transwomen...even if they have a GRC. Single sex spaces are relied upon by women to feel safe

Transpeople shouldn't be targeted in any way but women sometimes want to be just with other women. Re Gender recognition and waiting lists - there are processes in place for people to change gender if they want to and we have made them easier and cheaper. Plus we are opening up

more GI services for adults. I'd like to close by thanking everyone. We will come back once we have considered in detail all of the consequences. Thank you for contributing today.

Tonia Antoniazzi: It is our priviledge to debate the laws of this land. I applaud you all today. We are doing our work. These 2 positions are not about gender self-id and are nothing to do with Intersex medical conditions - the people who have these conditions do not want to be

brought into these discussions.
Single-sex spaces are important for women given the patterns of male violence. We are responsible for discussing issues and this is important for all of us

Chair: Re the two petitions. The ayes have it

Sitting is ended