u/kmcradie

“This follows a decision taken by His Honour Judge James Tayler on July 30 2026 that there are reasonable grounds for bringing 13 grounds of appeal contained in Mrs Peggie’s notice of appeal dated January 19 2026.”

Looks like this needs a bit of a push to get over the line.

How "brainy" do you think he is? And what was his path to a big office at No. 10, with a bowl of satsumas and a fucking pantry with a door that doesn't open? A South London comprehensive? Poxbridge? A YOP scheme?

Thank you for contacting me about the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s (EHRC) updated Code of Practice, for services, public functions and associations, which includes guidance on single-sex spaces.

I apologise if my response has taken longer to reach you than either of us would have wished, but as this is such a sensitive issue, I wanted to be sure of the implications of the code and how they would affect people in the community before responding.

I strongly believe that trans people should be treated with utmost dignity and respect and that it is important that they feel safe. Everyone should be able to be themselves free from intimidation and abuse.

With regard to EDM 240, I should clarify that, as presented, it is not a ‘prayer motion’ and, as such, does not engage the statutory scrutiny mechanism you describe. As you highlight, last year’s Supreme Court ruling clarified that sex in the Equality Act 2010 refers to biological sex however, it is important to note that trans people retain a protected characteristic.

After careful scrutiny and consideration by Ministers, updated guidance from the EHRC was, as you know, laid before parliament in May to reflect the clarification provided by the court.

I know that trans people and organisations have expressed concern about this new guidance. I would emphasise that neither the Supreme Court’s judgement, nor the new Code of Practice, alter the fact that trans people remain a protected group under the Equality Act 2010, and trans people should be able to live their lives free from harassment and discrimination. No rights have been removed as a result of this guidance; nothing has changed in respect of rights accorded under the Equality Act.

The following text, from the guidance may be helpful to you:

‘2.46 A person who dresses and presents in ways which are commonly associated with the opposite sex will be protected where they do so as part of a process of reassigning their sex. The Act does not define what is meant by reassigning sex. It does not have to be a medical process – though some people will take medical or surgical steps – but it is likely to at least involve more permanent changes, such as changing one’s pronouns and consistently dressing and presenting as the opposite sex. A person presenting in a gender non-conforming way for some other reason does not have the protected characteristic of gender reassignment. However, they may be protected against harassment and discrimination by perception (read paragraph 4.51 to paragraph 4.53).’

‘2.43 There is no minimum age for the protected characteristic of gender reassignment, which means that children and young people are protected if they are proposing to undergo, are undergoing, or have undergone a process of gender reassignment.’

You can read more about the Code and what it means here.

The new guidance, while reflecting the ruling of the Supreme Court with regards to single-sex spaces, also emphasises that service providers should make sure that trans people have access to essential services, such as toilets. It says that they should consider if and how trans people may be disadvantaged and suggests a holistic approach to service provision by providing a mix of services that could include both separate or single-sex spaces and mixed-sex services. Legal advice should be sought if or when it is needed.

It is extremely important to note that the Supreme Court, alongside its ruling, warned against reading its judgement “as a triumph of one side at the expense of another”. It explained that, as I have indicated, trans people remain protected under the Equality Act 2010, not only against discrimination through the protected characteristic of gender reassignment, but also against direct discrimination, indirect discrimination and harassment in substance in their acquired gender. These protections are available for transgender people regardless of whether they possess a Gender Recognition Certificate or not.

The Minister for Equalities, Seema Malhotra MP, recently made a statement in the House of Commons on the updated Code of Practice on 1 June. She reiterated that, where a single-sex service is being provided, this will be provided on the basis of biological sex. However, she confirmed that trans people must also have access to required services, such as toilets. She also confirmed that the Code does not provide people with the right to challenge one another on their sex and their access to those spaces- respect for people’s privacy remains important.

You can read the Minister’s full statement to the House of Commons on the updated Code of Practice here should you so wish.

The code has been updated in a range of other areas as well, covering protections for disabled people, advice on pregnancy and maternity discrimination, and age discrimination. It covers protections for women whose menopause has a substantial and long-term adverse effect on their everyday life, as well as updates to reflect changes in the law on same-sex marriage.

I back the Government in its belief that everybody in society must be treated with dignity and respect, and we must uphold the Equality Act. I also believe that politicians, in positions of authority, must speak up about the importance of these shared values of tolerance, respect and fairmindedness.

Thank you once again for reaching out to me on this matter.

Yours sincerely,

Patricia Ferguson MP

Member of Parliament for Glasgow West

Archive link

It's me, Angela Rayner and Wes Streeting in a cage, fucking lump hammer each, whacking the shit out of each other. The last man standing wins a fucking Ford Focus.

Doctors on the medical body say the author of the critical report has been vindicated — but believe they should still be allowed to prescribe puberty blockers