“For Women Scotland” Supreme Court Ruling Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateDepartment: Department for International Development
Luke Evans
Main Page: Luke Evans (Conservative - Hinckley and Bosworth)Department Debates - View all Luke Evans's debates with the Department for International Development
(1 week, 2 days ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Bridget Phillipson
The Supreme Court’s judgment was clear on biological sex, but I do understand and recognise the need to ensure that there is provision in place for everyone in our society, including toilet facilities. That is why many businesses and service providers provide unisex facilities, while many service providers will also put in place enclosed bathrooms that do not require people to make that decision to ensure that their dignity and privacy are respected. That is important for all people in our country.
Dr Luke Evans (Hinckley and Bosworth) (Con)
I have a practical question: does the ruling apply retrospectively? If, for example, someone was to have lost their job for their views or won a title in sport, would it apply retrospectively—yes or no?
Bridget Phillipson
I think the hon. Gentleman is referring to employment law cases, on which I would have to defer to legal colleagues. The judgment set out that the Equality Act 2010 is the basis for single-sex spaces being determined on the basis of biology. The Court determined that that was always the case and had always been the case since 2010—it was his party that failed to provide that clarity over 14 years.