Trans people still protected says minister as single-sex spaces guidance laid

Aine Fox, Press Association Social Affairs Correspondent
New guidance on single-sex spaces ensures the protection of “people’s rights across our country”, the equalities minister said as she laid the long-awaited code before Parliament.
The updated guidance has been published more than a year after a landmark Supreme Court ruling in April 2025 which said the words “woman” and “sex” in the Equality Act 2010 refer to a biological woman and biological sex.
Women and equalities minister Bridget Phillipson said that ruling had “made it clear that sex means biological sex” under the Equality Act, “and that trans people are still protected by the Act”.
The Government said the new code “gives organisations clear, workable guidance which will enable them to take a pragmatic approach to protecting and serving the needs of our society” and supports service providers such as hospitals, cafes and leisure centres “in ensuring they can make practical, and ultimately sensible decisions for every day scenarios, such as toilet provision”.
While women’s rights campaigners said the publication of the code on Thursday must mark “an important turning point” in a long-running debate about sex and gender identity, trans rights activists have insisted trans people’s “participation in public life” must be protected.
The code of practice for services, public functions and associations, which runs to more than 300 pages, covers nine protected characteristics including age, sex, disability, race and gender reassignment, and has been updated in full for the first time since 2011.
It is aimed at guiding businesses and other organisations such as leisure centres and hospitals on how they can follow equality law, including in provision of single and separate-sex services such as toilets and changing rooms.
A draft code was handed to ministers by the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) last September and the Government has faced criticism for the delay in publishing it.
In the intervening period, Ms Phillipson had argued the Government was “taking the time to get this right” and said it was both important that “women have access to a single-sex provision” and that trans people “should be treated with dignity and respect”.
The Prime Minister’s spokeswoman reiterated this on Thursday, rejecting a suggestion it was choosing to publish on the last day before Parliament breaks up for recess in an attempt to bury bad news.
In response, the Downing Street spokeswoman said: “No, as I said, we’ve been focused on getting it right and ensuring duty bearers are able to uphold the law.”
Ms Phillipson, in a written statement to Parliament, said: “The current Code was produced in 2011 and there have been significant developments since then, including the Supreme Court ruling in For Women Scotland, resulting in the EHRC wanting to update the Code.
“Following last year’s Supreme Court ruling, the draft Code’s content on sex and gender reassignment has changed substantially from the 2011 version.
“The ruling made it clear that sex means biological sex for the purposes of the Equality Act 2010 and that trans people are still protected by the Act under the protected characteristic of ‘gender reassignment’.”
She added: “This government is proud of the Equality Act 2010 and will protect and uphold it; this Code is an important step in ensuring that organisations across Great Britain have clear guidance regarding its implementation, protecting people’s rights across our country.”
Scrutiny
The code of practice, which would apply across England, Scotland and Wales has now been laid before Parliament for scrutiny from both MPs in the Commons and peers in the Lords.
It will not be enacted for 40 days.
While a vote would not be required to enact the code and make it statutory, either House could pass a motion to reject it within that period.
EHRC chairwoman Mary-Ann Stephenson previously said no-one is expecting there to be “toilet police” and suggested organisations with self-contained male and female toilets could make them unisex.
‘Misrepresented’
Cathy Larkman of the gender critical campaign group Women’s Rights Network Wales said: “While we welcome the announcement by Bridget Phillipson regarding the EHRC Code of Practice, it has been 400 days since the Supreme Court judgment which clarified the law on women’s rights in single-sex spaces and services.
“400 days in which the Minister could have made a difference to the lives of women and girls across the country.
“400 days in which real leadership could have been exercised.
“400 days in which all those years of the laws being misrepresented could have been put right.
“400 days in which public organisations could and should have amended their unlawful policies to protect the rights of women and girls.
“This announcement has been delayed and dithered upon to an unacceptable degree. In the meantime, there have been serious implications for the rights of women and girls in private areas such as toilets, changing rooms, hospital wards, rape crisis and domestic violence centres, prisons and in sports.
“This announcement means the excuses of all those organisations claiming to be ‘waiting for the guidance’ are now over. No more excuses.
“We at WRN Wales will be holding them to account, on behalf of all women and girls in Wales.
“We call on the Welsh Government to unequivocally welcome and support the guidance, and to ensure it is adopted throughout Wales immediately.”
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.


No, they are falling for the far right band wagon. This is an absolute mess.
No it’s not I’m afraid. It’s very very simple.
Odd to call women’s rights right-wing. Very ‘blokey’ of you!
Jeff, I would take a fair bet they you have written your comment without reading the 300 page guidance.
Listen to the people it harms.
So you have not read it. So you have no idea if it is harmful or whom does it harm, if at all
Have you read it? I have
So have I , because I’ve been involved with the application. You simply put an unisex toilet, You can convert a single sex toilets into half a dozen single cubicles. I have 2 unisex toilets/ washing facilities in my house.
If there is need of a changing room, then you put individual unisex. changing rooms. You retain all existing single sex toilets and if needed changing rooms.
Now what is so difficult in that. What is so traumatic to go into a single person unisex toilet. Every household in Britain has at least one
Huge relief to get this over the line but silly that they dragged it out so long after the very clear SC judgement. Very important (and very reasonable) to protect the spaces (loos, changing rooms, hospital wards etc) and sports of biological women and girls from biological men and boys. Sensible stuff. Very sad, however, that the Welsh FA etc will now be forced to act when their English and Scottish counterparts got it sorted a year ago. Anyway. Onwards and upwards. Respect to trans people too of course.
Oh I’m so sure you respect trans people. I expect some of your best friends are trans.
Jess it saddens me too hear you say this. How can you respect trans people by excluding them from all gendered activities and facilities?
Why should a trans man with male genitalia be treated as a woman for the purposes of anything? Isn’t your whole thing that women can’t have male genitalia?
Agree, a trans man with male genitalia should not be treated as a woman for the purposes of anything.
Ok but the new guidelines say that they should be treated as a woman.
Under British law the definition of a woman now seems to be someone who looks like a woman, but also sometimes someone who looks like a man.
How does this keep me safe from cis men Clive
Well said. Very important to protect women’s spaces from, well, men. It’s all very odd.
Transwomen aren’t men though. I agree cisgender men are a threat to women. and trans women. And trans men. And children. And other men. And themselves. And the men who get it agree with me
you don’t respect trans people at all. You consider them predators. Otherwise why else would you refer to protecting women and girls? From whom?
This is such a mess. It is now illegal for a women’s group to include trans women even if they want to and their are no objections.
I personally won’t be excluding my trans sisters from anything. The government telling women who they can and can’t associate with is the opposite of feminism and will not do anything to keep cis women safe from cis men.
No it’s not. You are free to do what you like. It’s just that biological men aren’t allowed in the ladies’ scrum or cinema toilets. Simple.
I’ve never had any problem with trans women in any women’s toilets Clive. It’s simply not a problem in the real world.
They can include trans women, but if they do they must also include cis men in case the poor dears feel discriminated against.
Yes. Because both are biological men.
Can you point me to a science book that states what “biological sex” is. Because I’ve never heard an actual scientist use that term before. Only people who don’t like trans people.
I can. Robert Winston the renowned scientist covered it succinctly. Basically you are your biological sex down to every cell in your body. It is immutable – it cannot be changed. Ever.
Well I looked him up and he doesn’t have any peer reviewed work in the area of sex and gender. Not really a very renowned source there George.
Can you give me somebody with some actually work in the area?
But they also can’t include trans men who you’d call biological women.
Yes. Trans men are biologically women. They should use the women’s toilets. See how simple it is?
Not according to this guidance.
That would be fun. Then cis men could pretend they were trans men and just walk in to sexually assault women, without having to go through the long and expensive gender transition
Nope. Trans women are women . Biological man or biological woman are scientifically illiterate nonsense terms invented by TERFs because they couldn’t find an accurate way to define a woman that included all women but excluded trans women.
I mean cis woman was right there but they decided it was a slur because Elon musk told them it was
Me neither. I’m with you Rhea. ALL women are welcome including transwomen. Except TERFs.
Identity, not ideology
I would like to point out that this guidance does not change the legal status of anybody. It is not law. The law on this was sorted out a year ago.
Comment of the day. Nail on the head. Biological men just need to stay out of the women’s loos etc.
There is no law dictating which toilets people have to use, only which toilets must be provided. Nobody has ever been prosecuted for using the ‘wrong’ toilet.
No. The SC judgement is very clear and the guidance reiterates it. Simply use the facilities aligned to your biological sex. If you are a biological man charging into the loos of biological women then you are doing something illegal. Very simple. If everyone sticks to that then there are no issues whatsoever. So straightforward.
Show me the bit of legislation or the paragraph in a bit of caselaw that says it’s illegal for a trans woman to use a women’s toilet.
I’ll save you the time: it doesn’t exist. This is all about provision.
You haven’t even read the guidance. That’s not what it says at all
I believe you need to read what happened in Glan Clwyd Hospital last year.
http://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/rapist-jailed-life-attacking-woman-31051528
Agreed nothing difficult in that, why has it taken so long.
Because it was and still is a vague unworkable mess. This is going to cost billions in court cases. It contradicts the EHA section 8 which cannot be overturned unless UK leaves the ECtHR. It contradicts the GRA. It contradicts the H&SaWA and most importantly it contradicts itself. The duty is on service providers not individuals and if challenging women must do it sensitively and discreetly (how do you prove that in a court of law?)and you are not permitted to ask for documentation. you should also take each case on its own merits rather than have a blanket ban,… Read more »
They should. Biological trans women should be permitted though
It does not protect trans people at all. It is a hateful soup on unenforcable nonsense that will harm cis women as much as trans people.
It is going to cost businesses a small fortune to upgrade their toilets and it codifies protections for abusive people to harrass trans people.
Trans people are incredibly disadvantaged by this. I predict many expensive years of trying to make this tangled mess of segregtionist legislation even remotely workable.
And i think it is probably the last nail in Labour’s coffin. So there’s that at least
According to The Metropolitan Police, on average more than 20 sexual assaults a year are committed in toilets within their jurisdiction.