(1 week, 5 days ago)
Lords ChamberI hear what the noble Viscount says. The Supreme Court judgment is clear about biological sex; we have to and we will ensure compliance. The independent Equality and Human Rights Commission has come up with guidance. That guidance has gone through a lot of process and consultation, and people have been listened to in respect of that. But we have to work our way through in a proportionate way. As I say, trans people are not just trans women but also trans men, and how we accommodate all these things is really important. We must respect their rights under the Equality Act but we must also fully comply with the Supreme Court judgment.
My Lords, I went out with two female friends, one of whom was thrown out of a women’s toilet because she was wrongly identified as a man. As the guidance allows trans men to be excluded from single-sex spaces on the basis of appearance, how does the clear and practical guidance protect masculine-looking women from being excluded from women-only spaces?
I come back to my original response. The idea that somebody is making a judgment because of the way someone is dressed or looks is inappropriate. I think it is pretty obvious if a man goes into a women’s toilet by error or sometimes due to absolute need—which I have done, once, although I was told quite quickly, “This is not the place for you”. But common sense applies here. I have spent my life with the LGBT community and have spent my life visiting and participating in parties in clubs and bars where there is a whole range of people, whether feminine men or masculine women. We should not be making a judgment on that. It is British common sense which will apply in the application of this code. The idea that someone is told that they cannot use a toilet because they look a particular way is not very British.
(11 years, 6 months ago)
Lords ChamberMy Lords, I declare an interest, having married a Norwegian man in 2009 in Norway. My marriage is now recognised as a marriage in the UK, whereas previously it was recognised only as a civil partnership.
Today we are nearing the end of the legislative road as far as equality for same-sex couples in the UK is concerned. There have been some ironies along the way. The late Lady Thatcher—considered by many to have been a conviction politician—and the Conservative Government that she led, introduced Section 28 into the Local Government Act 1988, provoking the noble Lord, Lord Cashman, and others to form the pressure group Stonewall to fight for equality for lesbian, gay and bisexual people. When the Labour Party came to power, it repealed Section 28, although it had to invoke the Parliament Act to overcome opposition in this House. How times have changed.
Under a Labour Government, civil partnerships were introduced in 2004. That was progress but still not equality. It was left to this coalition Government—a Conservative-led coalition Government—to achieve equality for same-sex couples. It was the Liberal Democrat MP, the right honourable Lynne Featherstone—the then Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Equalities—who proposed that the Government introduce legislation to allow equal marriage. To his credit, the Prime Minister agreed despite opposition from many in his own party. In contrast to its implacable opposition to the repeal of Section 28, this House agreed to equal marriage without a Division at Third Reading.
I place on record my thanks to Nick Boles MP and to my noble friend Lady Northover for achieving the changes to these regulations to allow those wishing to celebrate the conversion of their civil partnership to an equal marriage to do so in places and in ways that those same-sex couples not previously in a civil partnership are allowed to do.
I say that we are nearing the end of the legislative road as far as equal marriage is concerned but it is to be regretted that equal marriage is still not possible in Northern Ireland. The Liberal Democrats not only support the approval of these regulations but we are also very proud to have played such a prominent role in achieving equal marriage in England, Wales and Scotland.
My Lords, I, too, acknowledge the journey we have travelled. It has been a long and sometimes very difficult one but nothing gives me greater pleasure than to acknowledge that we have a cross-party consensus on equality under the law. That is something that we can be proud of in this country and is not something to be ashamed of.
I, too, thank the Minister, Nick Boles, and the noble Baroness, Lady Northover, for listening to all those people in civil partnerships who, like me, want to take this final step of equality under the law by marrying in front of our friends and family. I was really pleased that the original drafts were taken back, and that we are still now able, with the help of the department, to stick to the original timetable. It is a great achievement and I am pleased that the Minister was able to do that. It is not easy, sometimes, for Ministers to take something back and work on it, but they did a great job and I am thankful to them.