Minister hopes gender ruling ‘draws a line’ under issue

A minister has said she hopes the Supreme Court’s ruling on the legal definition of the term woman will draw a line under arguments over gender recognition, but accepted more “homework” needed to be done on what it will mean in practice.

Care minister Karin Smyth welcomed the “clarity for women” provided by the court’s judgment and said the “NHS will obviously be complying” along with “every other public body”.

On Wednesday it was ruled that the terms woman and sex in the 2010 Equality Act “refer to a biological woman and biological sex”. This means that transgender women with a gender recognition certificate (GRC) can be excluded from single-sex spaces if “proportionate”.

The decision was hailed as a victory by campaigners, but LGBT charity Stonewall described the judgement as “incredibly worrying for the trans community”.

Speaking to Sky News on Thursday morning, Ms Smyth said: “I think it’s good that we have clarity for women, and the women who brought this case, and for service providers providing services.”

Asked whether she thought the ruling would further inflame arguments, she told the programme: “No, I really hope that it does draw a line under it by clarifying what sex means, by clarifying that people have different protected rights under the Equality Act and being very clear to all organisations what that means.”

NHS officials have confirmed they will consider the ruling as they update guidance on same-sex hospital wards.

Current NHS England guidance on the issue is laid out in a document from 2019 which says that “trans people should be accommodated according to their presentation: the way they dress, and the name and pronouns they currently use”.

Ms Smyth told BBC Breakfast that the “ruling is very clear” and “the NHS will obviously be complying with that as every other public body will”.

She told the programme that rights are enshrined in the Equality Act and “there are protected characteristics for trans people under the gender recognition part of the Equality Act”.

Asked whether there is “quite a bit of homework” to be done on how the ruling would affect people on a daily basis, Ms Smyth said “yes” and pointed to the origins of the case in Scotland.

Campaigners have said the judgment could have far-reaching consequences for sports and single-sex spaces such as changing rooms and hospital wards.

The justices said providers of single-sex spaces including changing rooms, homeless hostels and medical services would face “practical difficulties” if the word “sex” was interpreted as being wider than just biological sex in the 2010 legislation.

Responding to the news on Wednesday, a Government spokesperson said that “single-sex spaces are protected in law and will always be protected by this Government”.