Equality Act 2010: Section 106

Baroness Stedman-Scott Excerpts

Tuesday 10th March 2026 Lords Chamber

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I do not want to see that in Hansard, by the way. We want to ensure that candidates reflect the communities they seek to represent —that is the purpose—and transparency is a key tool to ensure that. When we consult, we will look at all the measures contained in the Equality Act and Section 106. We have not yet decided what characteristics would be included, but the noble Lord makes an incredibly important point about the need to take action.

[Baroness Stedman-Scott (Con)]

My Lords, the Conservative Party is proud to have had four women leaders, and I am proud to be part of a House that has had so many successful women in it. I think about the late PD James, the late Baroness Audrey Emerton, my dear friend Baroness Helen Newlove and of course the noble Baroness, Lady Smith, the Leader of the House now. We believe that when people with a range of experiences come together, better decisions are made. Can the Minister say what practical steps the Government are taking to encourage more women, and young women in particular, to take an active role in politics?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

We can take a number of measures and, focusing on how young people generally can engage in our political process, that involves education. We had an excellent Select Committee report on precisely that issue. The noble Baroness makes a very good point about the range of people we should have in our representative democracy. That includes people who do not necessarily have the high level of education of some but who have huge life experience, which can contribute to our deliberations. We are taking action with education and support, but political parties themselves have a responsibility, which is what Section 106 is about. Each of us can do more to ensure that representation.

Equality and Human Rights Commission

Baroness Stedman-Scott Excerpts

Thursday 26th February 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Ludford (LD)]

My Lords—

[Baroness Stedman-Scott (Con)]

My Lords—

[Lord Kennedy of Southwark (Lab Co-op)]

If the noble Baronesses can be quick, we can get the Front Bench in and then the Liberal Democrats.

[Baroness Stedman-Scott (Con)]

There are hundreds of documented NHS trusts which still have unlawful policies with regard to the provision of single-sex hospital accommodation. The NHS policy annex B continues to authorise the placement of biological men on women’s hospital wards. Will the Government act now and instruct these organisations to follow the law? If they continue not to, can they explain when they will act?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I repeat what I said to the noble Lord. There are many policies in existence that will obviously need to undergo review as a consequence of the Supreme Court judgment. That review will have implications, for not just sex but all the other protected characteristics. Many of these policies cover a whole range of issues. The fundamental point, which I made to the noble Lord, is that the Government and all government departments will comply with the law. That is my answer to the noble Baroness.

Single-Sex Spaces: EHRC Guidance

Baroness Stedman-Scott Excerpts

Monday 2nd February 2026 Lords Chamber

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I am a Minister with many responsibilities, and I am not sure that I am in the Cabinet Office at the moment. One thing I am absolutely sure about is that I am Deputy Leader of this House, and I would not wish to mislead it. I was trying to convey that the Government are absolutely committed to ensuring compliance with the Supreme Court judgment. It may not be what the noble Lord hinted at, but the Government are being very clear that there should be compliance with the Supreme Court judgment. That is why we want the code of practice, which the noble Baroness was obviously involved in, to be fully considered, properly accounted for and robust for the future. That is what we are determined to do, and it will result in all public bodies and companies being fully compliant with the Supreme Court judgment.

[Baroness Stedman-Scott (Con)]

My Lords, if the Government have concerns about the lawfulness of the EHRC code, given their five-month review of 30 pages, have they received any advice from the Attorney-General regarding his assessment of it? When was the Attorney-General consulted?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I think the noble Baroness knows that I am not going to go into legal advice from the Attorney-General. This is not about whether the guidance or the draft code is compliant legally; it is to ensure that the guidance can be adopted and applied by everyone without future legal challenge. That is what I am saying very clearly. It is robust guidance. After all, it has never been the position to say that the code is not legal. The code may well be, but we want to ensure that it can be applied properly and adopted by all public bodies and companies.

Equality Act 2010: Meaning of “Sex”

Baroness Stedman-Scott Excerpts

Wednesday 15th October 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I understand that many trans people may have read the human rights commissioner’s correspondence. I reread it this morning. It will undoubtedly raise concern among trans people. We have been clear that the laws to protect trans people from discrimination and harassment will remain in place. Trans people will still be protected on the basis of gender reassignment, a protected characteristic within the Equality Act.

[Baroness Stedman-Scott (Con)]

My Lords, according to the Equality and Human Rights Commission, the Government received the full revised code of practice on 4 April. Only three chapters of it were altered in the updated version following the Supreme Court ruling. Can the Minister explain why there has been such a delay to review only three chapters and how much longer it is expected to take?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I do not accept the noble Baroness’s assertion. The department received the final draft code on 4 September. It is 300 pages long. That code needs detailed consideration because, as my noble friend pointed out, we want to avoid uncertainty. We want to ensure, as the Equality and Human Rights Commission is absolutely concerned to ensure, that there is absolute clarity on the Supreme Court decision. That is why we will take the necessary time to ensure that, when it is presented for full consideration by Parliament, it is as accurate and legally proofed as possible. There has been no delay.