This is a confusing letter @sianberry.
I have some questions:
1. You’re asking for legislative action in response to a non-legislative Code. Assuming it’s the Equality Act you want to change, does it follow that you accept that the Code accurately reflects the Act as it is?
I have some questions:
1. You’re asking for legislative action in response to a non-legislative Code. Assuming it’s the Equality Act you want to change, does it follow that you accept that the Code accurately reflects the Act as it is?
https://twitter.com/TheGreenParty/status/2062494581598429471
2. If you accept the Code is legally accurate, why do you say it’s “not fit for purpose”? What would you have had the @EHRC do other than produce an accurate Code? Should they have made it up?
@EHRC 3. What do mean by this bit? The Code follows the Equality Act and the judgment of the Supreme Court. Are you accusing the Supreme Court of improper motivations or credulity? 
@EHRC 4. You refer to inconsistencies with the GRA and the risk of litigation. Do you believe the Supreme Court judgment to be inconsistent with the GRA? How do you envisage a claim being brought to a lower court to that effect, bearing in mind the principle of binding precedent?
@EHRC 5. You say the Code (I think you mean the Supreme Court judgment) is inconsistent with the ECHR. In what way(s)? Do you think the SC failed to consider human rights? Which ECHR authority supports whatever it is you’re asking for?
@EHRC 6. What are the legislative changes you want to see?
7. Have you considered how the Equality Act could be amended whilst preserving women’s and LGB people’s rights? Because you mention neither in your letter.
7. Have you considered how the Equality Act could be amended whilst preserving women’s and LGB people’s rights? Because you mention neither in your letter.
@EHRC 8. The Code suggests that additional mixed-sex facilities should be provided wherever practicable. Here you say trans people will be “forced” into them. Do you think it inappropriate for trans people to make any compromises at all in order to respect the needs of others?
@EHRC 9. Does it follow from this sentence that you’re suggesting legislative change only for trans people with GRCs? Are you aware that only around 9k GRCs have ever been granted (almost none have been refused), and the overwhelming majority of trans people have never applied for one?
@EHRC I have many other questions but for now I’d appreciate your considered response to these. This is important because other people have rights too, and deserve to know what political parties are campaigning for that could affect or even destroy them.
/end
/end
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
