Council ‘recognises no suitable provision’ for transgender and non-binary people in most of its 60 public toilets
Dale Spridgeon Local Democracy Reporter
A Welsh council says it recognises that it has “no suitable provision” for transgender and non-binary people in most of its 60 public toilets.
There is a statutory requirement for local councils to prepare and consider an equality impact assessment – in accordance with the Equality Act 2010 – when preparing public toilet strategies.
It comes after a recent ruling by the Supreme Court that gender within the act means only biological sex.
In its local toilet strategy report, due to be discussed at Cyngor Gwynedd’s cabinet meeting, on Tuesday, October 14, it said: “We as a Council expect users to respect this ruling.
“That said, we recognise that we do not have suitable provision for trans-gender and non-binary people in the majority of our toilets.
“We hope that the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s guidance will provide us with further guidance on this.”
One option being considered by some organisations is the use of accessible toilets.
But the report said: “That is not possible in Gwynedd’s accessible toilets as they can only be opened with a ‘Radar’ key which is especially for disabled people.”
But the ruling had been “taken into account,” in the council’s equality assessment for its 2025 toilet strategy.
The council must also address community toilet needs and improve facility standards under its control as part of the Welsh Government’s adoption of the Public Health (Wales) Bill, May 2017.
Resources ‘dwindling’
The council said it had been able to maintain its 60 public loos thanks to its Community and Town Council Partnership scheme.
Town and community councils contribute towards public toilet running costs, with the amount raised in Gwynedd for 2025 being £261,600.
This helped to “ensure that the Council continues to meet needs despite the fact that the Council’s resources are dwindling,” the report said.
It added that the £261,600 had been “essential to meeting the annual or seasonal cost of running the toilets”.
The scheme allows the public to use facilities at approved local establishments during their opening hours. The facilities are free to use and come without any expectation to purchase goods or services at the sites.
Participating organisations are obliged to keep toilets safe, clean, accessible and properly supplied.
A maximum grant of £500 per year is available to organisations, the exact amount depends on the number of hours the toilet is available, with the full amount being for 37.5 hours a week.
The council currently has 41 properties taking part, with one more still awaiting assessment.
The service providers must display a sign provided by the Council on a window or door showing the public they are scheme members.
Funding
The council says it has also been successful in attracting funds from the Shared Prosperity Fund for toilet improvements.
Some £234,000 secured upgrades to toilets in Barmouth and Abersoch during 2025/26.
The department had also received a capital bid of £80,000 to upgrade payment doors in three of five toilets, where a fee of 20p is payable.
New machines enable users to pay contactless as well as with cash. The doors are in toilets at the Maes, Pwllheli.
There are also plans to install new doors in the Empire toilets, Caernarfon and at Dolgellau.
Work was also recently completed on Aberdyfi, Pwllheli and Criccieth toilets, following a grant of £140,000 through the Shared Prosperity Fund.
Although Gwynedd Council does not provide specialist “changing places” facilities – there is no statutory requirement – there are three sites including Ffestiniog and Snowdonia Railway Station in Caernarfon, the Pontio Centre in Bangor and Corris Craft Centre, which do.
The Council is considering “opportunities” to develop the facilities if a grant becomes available.
“Ideally ‘changing places’ facilities need to be located within a staffed premises such as libraries, community centres or museums to avoid concerns about vandalism,” the report stated.
Support our Nation today
For the price of a cup of coffee a month you can help us create an independent, not-for-profit, national news service for the people of Wales, by the people of Wales.
But they can use the toilet for their sex: female transgender and non-binary people can use the female toilets and male transgender and non-binary people can use the male toilets. Provision for everyone: everyone is included; no one is excluded.
Transgender women are men, thats why they have the word ‘transgender’ as a prefix. There are loos for men and no-one is stopping men using mens loos. The thing is, that MEN are not allowed in female toilets because women and girls need privacy, dignity and safety. The Council are wrong if they say there are no loos for transgender and non-binary.
There’s no biological justification for segregated facilities. Privacy, dignity and safety are all gender related issues and gender has now been abolished by the supreme court.
Sorry? There’s no biological justification for facilities segregated by sex? You think males should have unfettered access to spaces for girls and women? Do you really think that?
Privacy, dignity and safety are all sex-related issues, but ‘gender’ has not been abolished by the Supreme Court. Why on earth do you think that?
Privacy is a human requirement. A cubicle meets everyone’s biological needs. There’s no need to separate them by biological sex. The supreme court aligned gender to biological sex therefore rendering it obsolete.
Nice of you to speak for all girls and women – especially those who know that a simple cubicle is insufficient to protect them from the gaze and presence of males. Perhaps you don’t think they deserve dignity, privacy and safety? But why would any male want unfettered access to spaces where girls and women are more vulnerable, do you suppose? I suggest you read the Supreme Court ruling – all 268 paragraphs of it. It clearly says that sex is biological, but it also says that those with the protected characteristic of gender reassignment have not lost any rights.… Read more »
Women and girls are at risk from men and boys for social reasons, not biological reasons. Society teaches warped ideas to men and boys that makes them a danger. It has nothing to do with chromosome. Just look at the gender ideology preached by Andrew Tait. Without gender the extra protections you demand are not legally possible. Wait until someone raises a legal complaint against an employer or service provider who has separated cubicles and they are forced to queue for those allocated to women – costing time and money – while those allocated to men are mostly empty. This… Read more »
“Women and girls are at risk from men and boys for social reasons, not biological reasons.”
LOL!
So Andrew Tate isn’t having any impact on risk? He isn’t changing the biology of his followers so how is he making them more dangerous to women and girls unless it’s through gender as a social construct that you deny exists.
I never mentioned Tate and I didn’t say gender didn’t exist.
Why are girls and women at risk from males?
Read what Tate teaches about being a “proper man” to see how society not biology creates the threat.
Can you focus on and respond to the question I asked, please? I’m sure we can get on to the rest of your comment once we’ve sorted out the first bit.
I did answer your question. You just didn’t like the answer. Women and girls are at risk from men and boys due to warped attitudes and ideas, a dangerous gender ideology, of the sort Tate teaches about how men and women should behave. It’s an entirely social construct. It has nothing to do with biology. If it did, he wouldn’t need to teach it. Because it has nothing to do with biology it’s no longer possible to discriminate by biological sex for the purposes of protecting women and girls. Safe spaces for women and girls are no longer legal under… Read more »
LOL! Nope.
You are demonstrating that you do not have a clue what you’re talking about.
I’m done here. Thanks for the chat.
If I don’t have a clue you’d be able to construct a sensible response to demonstrate that.
But let’s talk about what’s really happening here. By abolishing gender as a flexible social definition of the male and female roles, which is what aligning it with biological sex is doing, you are removing the ability for men and women to not be defined by their biology.
This is a fundamentalist Christian project to return to “traditional” roles of women as childbearers and men as providers.
So you are happy with transgender women being assaulted by men, and big bearded transgender men entering the ladies? My what a kind soul.
Tell me how do you know that the big bearded men using the ladies are trans and not just cisgender men going in there to assault women (like transgender women don’t)?
That decision by the supreme court was so moronic
“transgender women being assaulted by men”
Why would they do that?