No 10 says Starmer no longer argues trans women are women amid barrage of harsh questions at briefing
The Downing Street lobby briefing this morning provided a good illustration of why trans rights has become such a corrosive topic for Labour. Here are some of the questions from reporters that the PM’s spokesperson had respond to about last week’s supreme court ruling.
Q: Does the PM still believe a trans woman is a woman? No, the PM’s spokesperson replied. He said the supreme court had set out the position.
Q: Does the PM regret going further than that in past statements? The spokesperson said he could not comment on the PM’s views when he was in opposition.
Q: If the PM meets trans women, will he refer to them using their preferred pronouns? The spokesperson said he would not discuss hypotheticals, referred again to the ruling, but said trans people should be treated “with dignity and respect”.
Q: When did the PM change his mind on what constitutes a woman, or did he leave this up to the supreme court? The spokeperson said Starmer has previously said a woman is an adult female. When it was put to him that Starmer used to say a trans women are women, the spokesperson said he could only comment on what Starmer has said since he has been PM.
Q: Did the PM change his mind on what a woman is before he came into government? The spokesperson said that Starmer has repeatedly said a woman is an adult female.
Q: Does JK Rowling deserve an apology? The spokesperson said he would not comment on individuals.
Q: Why did it take the PM so long to comment on the supreme court ruling? The spokesperson said the government issued a response after the ruling came out. Today was the first time when Starmer was asked about it, he said.
There used to be something of a consensus on trans rights in UK politics. When Theresa May was PM in 2017, she proposed allowing people to change gender without the need for medical checks – something that even Labour has now moved away from. There is a thesis to be written on why opinion on this has shifted so swiftly.
Key events
Roz McCall, a Scottish Conservative MSP, has written to the presiding officer of the Scottish parliament, suggesting that discplinary action should be taken against the Scottish Green MP Maggie Chapman over his comments about the supreme court. (See 12.51pm.) McCall says:
This afternoon, I have formally written to @POScotParl regarding the conduct of Maggie Chapman MSP following her comments concerning the verdict of the Supreme Court on the matter of For Women Scotland v The Scottish Ministers (2024) UKSC 16.
MSPs have responsibilities under the Code of Conduct and a legal duty under the Judiciary and Courts (Scotland) Act 2008. We should always act to protect the independence of the judiciary and these comments threatened the integrity of our judges. It cannot be allowed to stand.
Trans people have experienced ‘real anxiety’ following supreme court judgment, MSPs told
Transgender people have experienced “real anxiety” since last week’s supreme court ruling on how women are defined in equality law, MSPs have been told.
Addressing the Scottish parliamment, Shirley-Anne Somerville, the Scottish government’s social justice secretary, said:
Stakeholders that represent trans and non-binary people are reporting real anxiety from their networks and service users and concerns about their daily lives.
It is significant that the supreme court stated that their judgment that the rights of the trans community are enshrined in law and I want to reassure our trans community that you are valued and the Scottish government is fully committed to protecting everyone’s rights and that includes your community.
Somerville said the Scottish government accepted the court’s ruling, which she described as “significant”. The government would “take time to consider it”, she said.
She confirmed that the government would amend its guidance on the Gender Representation on Public Boards (Scotland) Act that triggered the legal challenge that led to the supreme court judgment. (The original guidance said that a trans woman would count as a woman for the purposes of the gender representation rules.)
And Somerville also confirmed the Scottish government had “no plans” to bring back its gender recognition reform bill, which would have allowed self-ID for trans people wanting a gender recognition certificate and which was blocked by the UK government.
DUP criticises minister for suggesting opinion polls could determine whether referendum held on Irish reunification
Rory Carroll
Rory Carroll is the Guardian’s Ireland correspondent.
Debate over when, or if, Northern Ireland will have a referendum on a united Ireland has kindled back to life, possibly by accident.
The 1998 Good Friday Agreement says a secretary of state should call a referendum if it appears “likely” that most of those voting would choose to leave the UK. Successive Northern Ireland ministers, Tory and Labour, have been coy about the criteria, leaving plenty of wiggle room.
However when the public policy magazine agendaNi.com asked Fleur Anderson, the under-secretary of state, about the criteria she gave a clear answer: “It would be based on opinion polls.”
The London MP, who was appointed to the post after Labour’s victory last July, did not mention election results, or the proportion of nationalist and unionist councillors, assembly members and MPs, or demographic shifts.
The Northern Ireland Office appeared to distance itself from her response – and to restore the mist that shrouds the issue – by saying responsibility for a referendum sits solely with the secretary of state. “This has been — and remains — the only condition. The secretary of state has been clear that there is no evidence that this condition has been met.”
The DUP called Anderson’s remark “ill-considered” and pointed out that since 1998 support for Sinn Fein and the Social Democratic Labour party – representing the nationalist bloc – has remained static at around 38%.
Sinn Féin, in contrast, insists momentum is moving towards unity. A recent LucidTalk poll showed 48% of Northern Ireland voters wish to remain in the UK and 41% favour constitutional change – a gap that has significantly narrowed over the past decade.
IMF warns of ‘major negative shock’ from Trump’s tariffs, as it cuts its UK growth forecast from 1.6% to 1.1%
Donald Trump’s tariffs have unleashed a “major negative shock” into the world economy, the International Monetary Fund has said, as it cut its forecasts for US, UK and global growth. The IMF now says the UK is expected to grow by 1.1% this year, down from 1.6% predicted in January. Heather Stewart has the story.
No 10 says Starmer no longer argues trans women are women amid barrage of harsh questions at briefing
The Downing Street lobby briefing this morning provided a good illustration of why trans rights has become such a corrosive topic for Labour. Here are some of the questions from reporters that the PM’s spokesperson had respond to about last week’s supreme court ruling.
Q: Does the PM still believe a trans woman is a woman? No, the PM’s spokesperson replied. He said the supreme court had set out the position.
Q: Does the PM regret going further than that in past statements? The spokesperson said he could not comment on the PM’s views when he was in opposition.
Q: If the PM meets trans women, will he refer to them using their preferred pronouns? The spokesperson said he would not discuss hypotheticals, referred again to the ruling, but said trans people should be treated “with dignity and respect”.
Q: When did the PM change his mind on what constitutes a woman, or did he leave this up to the supreme court? The spokeperson said Starmer has previously said a woman is an adult female. When it was put to him that Starmer used to say a trans women are women, the spokesperson said he could only comment on what Starmer has said since he has been PM.
Q: Did the PM change his mind on what a woman is before he came into government? The spokesperson said that Starmer has repeatedly said a woman is an adult female.
Q: Does JK Rowling deserve an apology? The spokesperson said he would not comment on individuals.
Q: Why did it take the PM so long to comment on the supreme court ruling? The spokesperson said the government issued a response after the ruling came out. Today was the first time when Starmer was asked about it, he said.
There used to be something of a consensus on trans rights in UK politics. When Theresa May was PM in 2017, she proposed allowing people to change gender without the need for medical checks – something that even Labour has now moved away from. There is a thesis to be written on why opinion on this has shifted so swiftly.
Keir Starmer has said it is “incredibly humbling” to see the work being done by allied nations to train Ukrainian troops, PA Media reports. PA says:
The prime minister also praised the “resilience” of Ukrainians as he visited a military base alongside his New Zealand counterpart, Christopher Luxon, to see the work under Operation Interflex.
More than 54,000 Ukrainians have already received training under the programme.
Starmer said: “This is the second time I’ve come to see this training for the front line in Ukraine, and, just as with the first time, I find it incredibly humbling to see the training that is being done here.”
Addressing the other nations taking part in the training, including Australia and New Zealand, he added: “It’s really humbling, it’s incredibly professional. It could not be more important three years into this conflict, and it’s so important in terms of the training that’s being done.”
The prime minister also thanked the Ukrainians taking part in the programme and said it is “incredible to see the resilience and inspiration that you have”.
He added: “I think it’s incredible that all of the predictions at the beginning of this conflict were that the aggressor Russia would succeed very quickly, and they didn’t. Because of the resilience of the Ukrainians, because you fought back and forth for your country and fought for all of us in fighting for your country.”
As part of today’s visit, Starmer and Luxon are expected to instruct their respective defence ministers to begin work on a new defence partnership between the two nations, replacing the one signed in 2015. [See 12.19pm.]
In her Today programme interview this morning Bridget Phillipson, the education secretary and minister for women and equalities, said the supreme court ruling meant that trans women should use male toilets. (See 9.55am.) In a later interview she gave a more nuanced answer, saying it was up to pubs to decide their own toilet policy. (See 10.28am.)
At the Downing Street lobby briefing the PM’s spokesperson sided with the first version of Phillipson’s answer. Asked what bathroom a trans person should use, the spokesperson replied:
They would use a bathroom consistent with their biological sex, as per the rule … That’s what the education secretary said this morning, and that’s what the court judgement makes clear – that all people should follow their biological sex when deciding what services they use.
No 10 refuses to commit to reversing Badenoch’s law curbing supply of unisex toilets – despite minister hinting more needed
In her Today programme interview Kemi Badenoch defended not having firm policies on some issues by saying that the Conservatives are in opposition and that an election is not imminent. But, on the isssue of single-sex toilets, Badenoch is still exerting considerable influence over government policy.
That’s because in May last year, shortly before the general election, Badenoch said that the government was bringing in secondary legislation to mandate “single sex toilet facilities in new non-domestic buildings to alleviate safety, privacy and dignity concerns”. She announced it in a news release saying the new law would “halt the march of gender-neutral toilets in buildings”.
The regulations are here. Government officials have recently confirmed to the Guardian that they remain in force.
In her Today programme interview this morning, in her response to the question about which toilet a trans person should use, Bridget Phillipson suggested she wanted to see more gender-neutral provision in place. (See 9.55am.)
But the rules mandate the opposite. As the government explained in May last year:
Changes to building regulations will mean that new non-domestic buildings, including restaurants, shopping centres, offices and public toilets will be required to provide separate single-sex toilets for women and men. Self-contained, universal toilets may be provided in addition, where space allows, or instead of single-sex toilets where there isn’t enough space.
At the Downing Street lobby briefing, the PM’s spokesperson was asked if the government planned to change the Badenoch regulations to make it easier for organisations to provide unisex toilets. The spokesperson said he was not aware of the regulations, although he said the regulations could be “updated as needed” following the court judgment.
He went on:
I think the court judgement provides clarity on something that’s already government policy, which is that single-sex spaces should be protected, will always be protected.
The ruling brings clarity and confidence to service providers, such as hospitals, refuges and sports clubs.
This answer suggests that government is happy with the current regulations.
Phillipson to make statement to MPs about supreme court ruling affecting law on single-sex spaces
There will be three ministerial statements in the Commons this afternoon, as well as an urgent questions. Here they are with rough timings.
3.30pm: A housing minister answers an urgent question from the Conservatives on the Birmingham bin strike.
Around 4.15pm: John Healey, the defence secretary, makes a statement on Ukraine.
Around 5.15pm: Bridget Phillipson, the education secretay and minister for women and equalities, makes a statement about last week’s supreme court ruling.
Around 6.15pm: Sarah Jones, a business minister, gives a statement on British Steel.
Faculty of Advocates criticises Scottish Green MSP over ‘appalling’ attack on supreme court
Maggie Chapman, a Scottish Green MSP and deputy convenor of the Scottish parliament’s equalities, human rights and civil justice committee, has been strongly condemned for remarks she made criticising the supreme court for its ruling on the definition of ‘a woman’ in equality law.
The Faculty of Advocates, the Scottish equivalent of the Bar Council, has released an open letter describing the comments as “appalling” and an attack on the independence of the judiciary.
In the letter, Roddy Dunlop KC, dean of the faculty, says:
It was with considerable concern and dismay that we read reports of Ms Chapman MSP addressing a public gathering in the wake of the recent ruling in For Women Scotland v Scottish Ministers. In video footage which is circulating widely online, she is seen to condemn what she claims is the “bigotry, prejudice and hatred that we see coming from the Supreme Court”.
These are appalling comments to come from any elected politician. They are all the worse when they come from someone who holds the post of Deputy Convenor of the Scottish Parliament’s Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee.
It really should not require to be said, but the Supreme Court – indeed, all judges – are in post to apply the law. They do not take sides. They decide without fear or favour, consistently with the judicial oath. For Ms Chapman to claim that they were swayed by “bigotry, prejudice and hatred” is outrageous. We are talking about the apex court of these islands, in this instance made up of a bench which included two of Scotland’s finest legal minds, as well as two women. No sensible person could read their dispassionate analysis and conclude that they were swayed by such matters.
Starmer to attend Pope’s funeral, No 10 says
Keir Starmer will be attending the Pope’s funeral in Rome on Saturday, Downing Street has confirmed.
Jakub Krupa has full coverage of events following the Pope’s death, and preparations for the funeral, on his Europe live blog.