To ask His Majesty’s Government, following the decision of the Supreme Court in For Women Scotland Ltd v The Scottish Ministers [2025] UKSC 16 on 16 April, what discussions they have had with Sport England on the meaning of “sex” in the Equality Act 2010.
The Government want to ensure that everyone can fully participate in society, including in sport. We equally want to ensure that everyone can participate in a way that ensures they feel safe. DCMS has discussed the ruling with Sport England and UK Sport, and they have confirmed they are considering the implications for their guidance. As my noble friend will be aware, national governing bodies set their own policies for who can participate in domestic competitions.
I thank my noble friend for that Answer. She knows that Sport England was set up by royal charter and is in receipt of public and lottery money, and indeed has a board appointed by the Secretary of State. However, it seems to be taking its time in considering the ruling, despite the ruling very clearly saying that, where the Equality Act allows for single-sex competitions, or anything else, that should be on the basis of biological fact, as Sport England acknowledges, because the retained differences in strength, stamina and physique between born men and women affect fairness and safety. Because of those retained differences, it is important that all sports put aside for women should have biological women there. Can the Minister encourage Sport England to move with a little more speed, because I know a lot of the bodies are waiting for its advice on this?
It is for each sport’s national governing body to set its own policies for who can participate in domestic competitions. They are supported to do this through guidance developed by our sports council, which is considering the implications of the Supreme Court ruling. The sports councils’ equality group’s transgender inclusion guidance was jointly produced by our five home sports councils. Following the Supreme Court’s ruling, they have said that they are consulting legal experts properly to understand the implications for their guidance.
The ruling clarifies the position under the Equality Act. It aligns with what the Government have always said about single-sex spaces. There has been interim guidance from the EHRC, and it is launching a six-week consultation on its draft updated statutory code of practice for services, public functions and associations tomorrow. I encourage all noble Lords to take part if they have views that they would like to feed in.
My Lords, the Minister will be aware that Sport England is committed to ensuring that LGBT people get as many opportunities and as much support to get active as others, as she has confirmed. I am slightly confused by the initial snapshot provided by the EHRC, and I wonder whether she can help clarify that. It suggests that trans men can use neither the men’s changing rooms nor the women’s changing rooms, so I am wondering how a trans man might be encouraged to get involved in sport on that basis.
We are keen, as I know the noble Baroness is, to make sure that all people, including trans people, can take part in sport. As I have said previously, it is for sports bodies themselves to determine the specific policies, but this will be done in line with guidance that is coming out in due course, on top of the interim guidance from the EHRC, which will be launching a six-week consultation tomorrow. I hope that this will resolve some of the issues that have been raised in relation to the interim guidance. We have ongoing discussions with every relevant body, to ensure that the law is applied in a humane, just and fair way.
His Majesty’s Government have spoken about the clarity that the Supreme Court judgment has brought to these discussions. However, I am slightly confused about the snapshot provided by the EHRC, which we have just been discussing, and the impact that it has on grass-roots sport. Does the Minister understand the instruction that, if 26 men come together to play football, a trans man cannot play, but if 24 men come together, a trans man can play? If she does understand it, would she explain it to me, please?
This is exactly the type of question that leads me to say that everyone with a view on this matter should please take part in the consultation which the EHRC is launching tomorrow. There is no intention for trans men or trans women to be excluded from sport. It will be for sports bodies themselves to consider how this can best be achieved, once the guidance has come out. Clearly, it is important that single-sex spaces are provided, but that we allow for respectful debate to resolve the issues that the noble Baroness has rightly raised.
My Lords, I must declare a significant conflict as a commissioner of the EHRC. I invite the Minister to clarify that it is not interim guidance that has been issued by the EHRC, as she said, but an interim update on the position, and that the consultation will open tonight, or first thing tomorrow morning, to conduct the consultation in order to draft the guidance. It would be very helpful if the Minister could clarify this, to allay the confusion both in this Chamber and in the press.
My Lords, as my noble friend the Minister has said, and as the noble Baroness has just said, the guidance at the moment has no legal standing whatever. As my noble friend will be aware, the Equality Act 2010 has always allowed trans people to be excluded from sport, and the Supreme Court judgment has not changed that. However, does my noble friend the Minister feel that it is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim to exclude trans people from, for example, chess, angling and orienteering?