Thread in response to @trussliz announcement yesterday.

While we are pleased that the UK Gov is giving attention to the importance of single-sex spaces and protections, we hope that consideration will be given to the situation throughout the country when framing terms. /

Our experience, sadly, leads us to believe that single-sex exceptions in the Equality Act have routinely been misrepresented by organisations in Scotland & even by @scotgov who try to allay & deflect fears of the impact of reform of GRA by saying that EA is reserved & unchanged./

However, while this Act remains open to a loose interpretation, the protection is weak. In the recent consultation on the GRA draft Bill, the Gov relied on the problematic EHRC code rather than the law. /

This enabled them to argue that “case-by-case” referred to individuals and ignored the explicit example of a single-sex service in the Act itself. /

Cabinet Secretary, @S_A_Somerville has told FWS that Scot Gov will shortly publish its own guidance on the Act. As the Equality Act is UK-wide law, it would seem appropriate that the guidance is the same in England and in Scotland.

Lack of clarity has resulted in Scot Gov funding requirement which exclude orgs utilising the provisions of the Act in full. Applicants to Equally Safe Fund must provide a trans inclusive plan for trans ID males or they will not be considered for funding. https://forwomen.scot/29/12/2019/funding-conditions/#more-1787

This is only possible if the Gov believes exclusion is on individual - not service - basis. We think this runs counter to the law, but we really need the sort of explicit guidance which the WM Women and Equality Committee stated was required last year./

The Westminster report also drew attention to the fact that women’s services lack the necessary resources to fix failures by public bodies in enforcing public service equality duty and that the lack of clarity and concerns about what constituted proportionality were having a /

“chilling effect” on the operation of single-sex provision and public sector monitoring. Without the will from Scottish & WM governments or public bodies to remedy this position, women’s services will remain unprotected. /

Our concern is that, without proper clarity, there is the chance that the Equality Act will be interpreted very differently in England and Scotland, and that reform of the GRA in Scotland could further erode the protections which supposedly exist in the Act. /

The conflicting definitions of "sex" in EA & GRA, coupled with the numerous attempts of Scot Gov funded organisations to variously redefine this as “lived” sex have already done a great deal of damage. /

The Gender Representation on Public Boards Act defined “woman” to mean anyone who uses “female language”. This is clearly inconsistent with EA, but despite overwhelming concerns raised in the consultation, the Gov have not said they will reconsider./ https://twitter.com/mbmpolicy/status/1252591931349184513?s=20

If the single sex protections referenced by Liz Truss are not properly codified into law, we fear a situation where the definition of protected category “sex” varies across the country. In the worst case, women could lose human rights at the Scottish border.