Recommendations & Conclusions
30 items
1
Recommendation
Third report- Reform of the Gender Reco…
Accepted
We consider the reduction in the fee for a Gender Recognition Certificate from £140 to £5 to be a step in the right direction. This new nominal amount will however contribute virtually nothing to the running of the Gender Recognition Certificate system and appears tokenistic. The Government’s consultation showed that …
Read more
We consider the reduction in the fee for a Gender Recognition Certificate from £140 to £5 to be a step in the right direction. This new nominal amount will however contribute virtually nothing to the running of the Gender Recognition Certificate system and appears tokenistic. The Government’s consultation showed that there is support for removing the fee altogether. We recommend that the Government provide a response to this report explaining its rationale for reducing the fee from £140 to £5.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government rejected the claim that the £5 fee reduction was 'tokenistic', explaining that it allowed for quick implementation via secondary legislation, unlike full removal which would require primary legislation. They noted a significant increase in GRC applications since the fee reduction, demonstrating its positive …
Read full response →
Government Equalities Office
2
Recommendation
Third report- Reform of the Gender Reco…
Accepted
We welcome the move to offer applicants a digital route. This will bring the process up to date with other Government services, which can be accessed online. The Government must ensure it is a system that can be accessed via smartphones as well as other devices. It will also need …
Read more
We welcome the move to offer applicants a digital route. This will bring the process up to date with other Government services, which can be accessed online. The Government must ensure it is a system that can be accessed via smartphones as well as other devices. It will also need to offer a non-digitised route for those people who do not have access to the right technology and who feel more able to submit documents in hard copy. In response to this report the Government must set out and commit to placing the process online in the next six months. It should provide regular updates to stakeholders, including this Committee, on what stage the process is at and immediately clarify whether a non-digitalised system will continue to exist.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government accepted the recommendation, confirming the digitised GRC application process is in its testing phase and will be operational by summer 2022. It assured the system's accessibility on smartphones and mobiles, and committed to retaining a paper-based application process for those who prefer it.
Read full response →
Government Equalities Office
3
Conclusion
Third report- Reform of the Gender Reco…
Acknowledged
The wording of the statement by the Minister for Women and Equalities suggested that the three clinics she referred to were new initiatives, driven by the Government Equalities Office in response to its consultation. The three pilot clinics in question had, in fact, already been announced and were a product …
Read more
The wording of the statement by the Minister for Women and Equalities suggested that the three clinics she referred to were new initiatives, driven by the Government Equalities Office in response to its consultation. The three pilot clinics in question had, in fact, already been announced and were a product of planning by NHS England. It is not clear that the Government Equalities Office had any input into these pilots. The inclusion of the clinics in the consultation response statement served only as a distraction from the lack of any real change to the gender recognition process.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government detailed that NHSEI is committed to commissioning a new service model, is evaluating existing pilot clinics by an independent third party, and will use these findings to develop a new service specification to ensure reduced waiting times are maintained.
Read full response →
Government Equalities Office
4
Recommendation
Third report- Reform of the Gender Reco…
Not Addressed
The length of time taken by the Government Equalities Office to respond to its own consultation is unacceptable. Not only did this delay exacerbate tensions between an already polarised group of stakeholders, but it also caused real distress to many within the transgender community. The Government’s own Consultation Principles make …
Read more
The length of time taken by the Government Equalities Office to respond to its own consultation is unacceptable. Not only did this delay exacerbate tensions between an already polarised group of stakeholders, but it also caused real distress to many within the transgender community. The Government’s own Consultation Principles make it clear that an explanation should be provided to stakeholders if a consultation response will not be issued within 12 weeks of the consultation closing. The GEO should have responded to its own consultation within the 12-week limitation, in line with the 2018 Government Consultation Principles document. Failing that, the GEO could and should have published a statement notifying stakeholders of its progress and reasons for the delay, especially given the sensitive nature of the consultation. It should have also indicated to stakeholders when a response was likely to be issued.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government acknowledged the importance of engaging with the committee but did not address the specific criticism regarding the unacceptable delay in responding to its consultation or the failure to communicate progress during the delay. It highlighted that a response was eventually published and Ministers …
Read full response →
Government Equalities Office
5
Recommendation
Third report- Reform of the Gender Reco…
Rejected
The Government’s reforms should improve the process for transgender people, whilst ensuring the appropriate safeguards for those with concerns. The Government should bring back an action plan for reform to the Gender Recognition Act within 12 72 Reform of the Gender Recognition Act weeks in those areas where there was …
Read more
The Government’s reforms should improve the process for transgender people, whilst ensuring the appropriate safeguards for those with concerns. The Government should bring back an action plan for reform to the Gender Recognition Act within 12 72 Reform of the Gender Recognition Act weeks in those areas where there was a majority in support for it. This should be done specifically in relation to the spousal consent provision, the requirement to live in the acquired gender and the diagnosis of gender dysphoria.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government explicitly rejected the recommendation for an action plan to reform the Gender Recognition Act, stating its September 2020 position on spousal consent, living in acquired gender, and diagnosis requirements remains correct and provides robust checks and balances. They clarified that the consultation was …
Read full response →
Government Equalities Office
6
Conclusion
Third report- Reform of the Gender Reco…
Not Addressed
Ministers are fundamentally accountable to Parliament and have a duty to make themselves available for scrutiny by the House and its committees. The same applies, with certain qualifications, to other public servants and public officeholders. We are deeply disappointed by the approach taken by both the Government Equalities Office and …
Read more
Ministers are fundamentally accountable to Parliament and have a duty to make themselves available for scrutiny by the House and its committees. The same applies, with certain qualifications, to other public servants and public officeholders. We are deeply disappointed by the approach taken by both the Government Equalities Office and the Equality and Human Rights Commission to this inquiry. We understand that the subject of Gender Recognition Act reform is controversial, contested and difficult. That does not mean that key bodies should shy away from engaging with the challenges it presents, or from connecting with stakeholders who hold views on the matter. Indeed, it makes it even more important that we should do so. The refusal of Government Equalities Office Ministers to attend our evidence session and properly engage with our inquiry is inexcusable. We appreciate that the Equality and Human Rights Commission has a core function as an enforcer. It also, however, has a responsibility to provide information, influence policy and be a catalyst for change. In our view, the Commission has neglected to adequately fulfil these functions in relation to Gender Recognition Act reform. It is a matter of deep regret that the Government and its public bodies have chosen to evade Parliamentary scrutiny on this contentious subject.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government's response did not address the committee's deep disappointment regarding the GEO and EHRC's perceived evasion of parliamentary scrutiny and failure to engage with the inquiry. Instead, it focused on rejecting the claim that the GRC fee reduction was 'tokenistic' and explained its rationale.
Read full response →
Government Equalities Office
7
Conclusion
Third report- Reform of the Gender Reco…
Not Addressed
The Government Equalities Office response to the consultation on the Gender Recognition Act was minimal and ignored areas where there was a majority in support for change. The Minister for Women and Equalities committed to reducing the fee, placing the process online and opening at least three new gender clinics …
Read more
The Government Equalities Office response to the consultation on the Gender Recognition Act was minimal and ignored areas where there was a majority in support for change. The Minister for Women and Equalities committed to reducing the fee, placing the process online and opening at least three new gender clinics in
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government's response defended the £5 fee reduction, arguing it was not 'tokenistic' and was implemented quickly via secondary legislation, leading to a significant increase in GRC applications. However, it did not directly address the committee's broader criticism that the overall consultation response was minimal …
Read full response →
Government Equalities Office
8
Recommendation
Third report- Reform of the Gender Reco…
Not Addressed
We remain frustrated at the degree of engagement by the Government Equalities Office and the Equality and Human Rights Commission. These key bodies have a vital role to play in enforcing and enacting real change in this area. They should be willing to participate in ongoing discussions with this Committee …
Read more
We remain frustrated at the degree of engagement by the Government Equalities Office and the Equality and Human Rights Commission. These key bodies have a vital role to play in enforcing and enacting real change in this area. They should be willing to participate in ongoing discussions with this Committee about the concerns of its stakeholders. We condemn the negligible engagement with our inquiry by both the Government Equalities Office Ministers and the EHRC, and the delay in response to the consultation which further polarised and toxified the debate. We call on the Ministers of the Government Equalities Office and the leadership of the EHRC to restate their commitment to cooperating with this Committee in all future inquiries. We also call on the Leader of the House, the Speaker of the House and the Chair of the Liaison Committee to respond to the concerns we have raised and take action to ensure that the Ministers comply in future with these accountability procedures and the Ministerial Code. (Paragraph 75) The Gender Recognition Act 2004
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government's response discusses the digitisation of the GRC application process, which is unrelated to the committee's call for ministerial cooperation and compliance with accountability procedures.
Read full response →
Government Equalities Office
9
Recommendation
Third report- Reform of the Gender Reco…
Not Addressed
We believe that the requirement of a diagnosis of gender dysphoria in order to obtain a Gender Recognition Certificate should be removed from the Gender Recognition Act, moving the process closer to a system of self-declaration. The legal recognition Reform of the Gender Recognition Act 73 process should not involve …
Read more
We believe that the requirement of a diagnosis of gender dysphoria in order to obtain a Gender Recognition Certificate should be removed from the Gender Recognition Act, moving the process closer to a system of self-declaration. The legal recognition Reform of the Gender Recognition Act 73 process should not involve medical scrutiny but strong legal safeguards. Appropriate safeguards are essential to ensuring that the rights of natal women and the use of the single-sex and separate-sex exceptions in the Equality Act 2010 are protected. Therefore, it is appropriate to retain the statutory declaration, as well as introduce additional legal tests. It would also be possible to police statutory declarations more strictly, and to bring prosecutions for fraudulent declarations if it becomes apparent that the person had no real intention of living in the acquired gender.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government's response details progress on digitising the GRC application process, which does not address the recommendation to remove the requirement for a gender dysphoria diagnosis.
Read full response →
Government Equalities Office
10
Recommendation
Third report- Reform of the Gender Reco…
Rejected
The Government should remove the diagnosis of gender dysphoria from the Gender Recognition Act by 2023, reflecting the support for this in responses to its own consultation. It must ensure that appropriate safeguards are in place when doing so, including retaining the requirement for a statutory declaration. Robust guidance on …
Read more
The Government should remove the diagnosis of gender dysphoria from the Gender Recognition Act by 2023, reflecting the support for this in responses to its own consultation. It must ensure that appropriate safeguards are in place when doing so, including retaining the requirement for a statutory declaration. Robust guidance on how a system of self-declaration would work in practice should also be developed. For example, male prisoners with a record of sexual assault or domestic violence, who self- identify as a woman, should not be transferred to a woman’s prison.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government rejects removing the diagnosis of gender dysphoria from the Gender Recognition Act, stating its current position is appropriate and that diagnosis requirements ensure a robust process. It will amend the reference to 'disorder' but not the diagnosis requirement itself, and highlights existing safeguards.
Read full response →
Government Equalities Office
11
Recommendation
Third report- Reform of the Gender Reco…
Rejected
There are significant problems with the requirement to have lived in the acquired gender. There is no clear, accepted or agreed definition of what living like a man or a woman is. This makes it difficult for a person to demonstrate whether they are masculine or feminine enough to obtain …
Read more
There are significant problems with the requirement to have lived in the acquired gender. There is no clear, accepted or agreed definition of what living like a man or a woman is. This makes it difficult for a person to demonstrate whether they are masculine or feminine enough to obtain a Gender Recognition Certificate. The requirement also risks entrenching outdated and unacceptable gender stereotypes. The Government should remove the requirement to have lived for a set period of time in the acquired gender from the gender recognition process immediately.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government rejected the recommendation to remove the requirement to have lived in the acquired gender, stating its September 2020 position on evidential requirements in the GRA remains appropriate and robust. They clarified that the assessment relies on routine documentary evidence rather than gender stereotypes.
Read full response →
Government Equalities Office
12
Recommendation
Third report- Reform of the Gender Reco…
Rejected
The requirement for an applicant legally transitioning to complete a statutory declaration is an essential safeguard which ensures that they are doing so with genuine intent. We believe this requirement must be retained. We accept that there are cases where some individuals might regret their decision to legally transition. We …
Read more
The requirement for an applicant legally transitioning to complete a statutory declaration is an essential safeguard which ensures that they are doing so with genuine intent. We believe this requirement must be retained. We accept that there are cases where some individuals might regret their decision to legally transition. We recommend that the wording of the statutory declaration be amended to permit people who have legally changed their gender identity to reverse their decision, should they so choose by removing the ‘until death’ requirement.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government rejects amending the wording of the statutory declaration, stating that its current position, including the evidential and diagnosis requirements in the Gender Recognition Act, strikes the correct balance and ensures a robust process.
Read full response →
Government Equalities Office
13
Recommendation
Third report- Reform of the Gender Reco…
Rejected
We have carefully considered the arguments for and against the spousal consent provision. The choice to transition by one spouse can, for some, fundamentally change the nature of the relationship and the marriage contract. The spouse of the person transitioning must be informed of their spouse’s decision to change their …
Read more
We have carefully considered the arguments for and against the spousal consent provision. The choice to transition by one spouse can, for some, fundamentally change the nature of the relationship and the marriage contract. The spouse of the person transitioning must be informed of their spouse’s decision to change their legal sex. We understand the importance of the spousal consent provision and the availability of the option for annulment for some individuals, including those from religious communities where divorce and same-sex marriage is not regarded favourably. On balance, we do not believe that the lack of consent from a spouse to remain in the marriage after the legal transition should lead to delay in an individual obtaining a full Gender Recognition Certificate. The current system places the burden for obtaining consent, or an annulment, on the parties to the marriage or civil partnership through the issue of an interim certificate. This has created delay and unfairness, which has led to trans people saying that this denies their basic rights and agency over their own bodies, and places it in the hands of their spouses.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government rejected the committee's implicit recommendation that spousal consent or annulment should not cause delay in obtaining a GRC. It maintained that its existing position, set out in September 2020, is correct, asserting that the current legislation strikes the right balance with proper checks …
Read full response →
Government Equalities Office
14
Recommendation
Third report- Reform of the Gender Reco…
Not Addressed
We recommend the requirement for spousal consent should be removed. When an application is made, the non-transitioning spouse should be notified by the body 74 Reform of the Gender Recognition Act processing the application (currently the Gender Recognition Panel) that their transitioning spouse has applied for a Certificate. The non-transitioning …
Read more
We recommend the requirement for spousal consent should be removed. When an application is made, the non-transitioning spouse should be notified by the body 74 Reform of the Gender Recognition Act processing the application (currently the Gender Recognition Panel) that their transitioning spouse has applied for a Certificate. The non-transitioning spouse should be given the option to either remain married/in a civil partnership or have the marriage/civil partnership annulled. If the spouse opts for an annulment, or does not respond, the body granting the certificate should issue an annulment at the same time as a full Gender Recognition Certificate, subject to appropriate safeguards. The transitioning spouse should also have the option to annul the marriage or partnership but not before the granting body is satisfied that the non-transitioning spouse is aware of the process. The body issuing the certificate will need to be given the power to issue annulments. Any connected matters, such as applications by either spouse for a financial order, should be dealt with by the family courts.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government's response commits to engaging fully with the Committee and building a constructive relationship, which does not address the recommendation to remove the spousal consent requirement for a Gender Recognition Certificate.
Read full response →
Government Equalities Office
15
Conclusion
Third report- Reform of the Gender Reco…
Not Addressed
We agree with the Government Equalities Office that the age of 18 is the appropriate age at which an individual should be able to decide on whether they want to apply for legal gender recognition. Part of the process of applying for legal recognition is making a statutory declaration. It …
Read more
We agree with the Government Equalities Office that the age of 18 is the appropriate age at which an individual should be able to decide on whether they want to apply for legal gender recognition. Part of the process of applying for legal recognition is making a statutory declaration. It would not be appropriate to expect a minor to accept that responsibility. The age of 18 is a suitable age for a person to consider the current and future ramifications of legally transitioning and to be asked to make a statutory declaration. This is consistent with the law relating to other long-term, legally binding undertakings.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government's response did not address the committee's conclusion agreeing that 18 is the appropriate age for legal gender recognition. Instead, it provided a generic statement acknowledging the importance of committee engagement and committing to a constructive relationship.
Read full response →
Government Equalities Office
16
Conclusion
Third report- Reform of the Gender Reco…
Acknowledged
We are aware that there has been a significant increase in the number of referrals to Gender Identity Development Services in recent years. We strongly believe that improved support is needed to help young people seeking to transition, especially mental health support. Young people should have access to services which …
Read more
We are aware that there has been a significant increase in the number of referrals to Gender Identity Development Services in recent years. We strongly believe that improved support is needed to help young people seeking to transition, especially mental health support. Young people should have access to services which work in tandem with gender identity clinics and allow them to discuss and explore their feelings about transitioning in detail. We welcome the work being undertaken in the Cass Review and look forward to reading its findings.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government acknowledges the need for improved support, detailing ongoing evaluation of pilot clinics to inform a new service model for adults and reiterating its commitment to investing in general mental health services through the NHS Long Term Plan, but not specific new actions for …
Read full response →
Government Equalities Office
17
Recommendation
Third report- Reform of the Gender Reco…
Rejected
Transparency around the operation and decision-making of the Gender Recognition Panel is a concern to many people applying for a Gender Recognition Certificate. It is clear to us that the existence of the Panel itself can, at times, discourage people from applying for a GRC. We believe that another system …
Read more
Transparency around the operation and decision-making of the Gender Recognition Panel is a concern to many people applying for a Gender Recognition Certificate. It is clear to us that the existence of the Panel itself can, at times, discourage people from applying for a GRC. We believe that another system should exist in place of the Gender Recognition Panel which allows for greater transparency. We note Scotland’s proposed changes to replace the Gender Recognition Panel with the Registrar General for Scotland and we believe this could be a move in the right direction. We heard conflicting evidence on whether the Gender Recognition Panel is providing the feedback that it is supposed to. We recommend that the Government conduct a review on whether the Gender Recognition Panel could be removed and replaced with the Registrar General for England and Wales, who already has a number of existing functions under the Gender Recognition Act. In the interim, more needs to be done to improve the transparency around the operation and role of the Panel. The GEO should satisfy itself that the Panel is carrying out its feedback requirements in line with the GRA and provide reassurance in response to this report. We recommend that the Government conduct a review on whether the Gender Recognition Panel could be removed and replaced with the Registrar General for England and Wales, who already has a number of existing functions under the Gender Recognition Act. In the interim, more needs to be done to improve the transparency around the operation Reform of the Gender Recognition Act 75 and role of the Panel. The GEO should satisfy itself that the Panel is carrying out its feedback requirements in line with the GRA and provide reassurance in response to this report
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government rejects the recommendation to replace the Gender Recognition Panel or conduct a review of its structure, stating it is satisfied the Panel is fulfilling its duties and that a replacement would not be appropriate. It highlights existing efforts to simplify the application process.
Read full response →
Government Equalities Office
18
Recommendation
Third report- Reform of the Gender Reco…
Not Addressed
Section 22 of the Gender Recognition Act is important. It ensures the privacy of transgender people by making it a criminal offence for a person who has acquired information about a person’s GRC, in an official capacity, to disclose it without the transgender person’s consent (except in limited circumstances). No …
Read more
Section 22 of the Gender Recognition Act is important. It ensures the privacy of transgender people by making it a criminal offence for a person who has acquired information about a person’s GRC, in an official capacity, to disclose it without the transgender person’s consent (except in limited circumstances). No prosecution has been brought under this section so far. We are concerned to hear about the fears many working in an official capacity have in relation to this provision, and we are not convinced that in all cases those handling GRC’s should be subject to criminalisation where mistakes could be made. We recommend that the Government amends section 22 of the Gender Recognition Act to ensure that only cases where there is evidence that the disclosure was deliberate and knowing, are covered. (Paragraph 141) The Equality Act 2010 and its interaction with the Gender Recognition Act 2004
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government's response did not address the recommendation to amend Section 22 of the Gender Recognition Act to cover only deliberate and knowing disclosures. Instead, it reiterated its view that the overall diagnosis requirements in the GRA are robust and appropriate.
Read full response →
Government Equalities Office
19
Recommendation
Third report- Reform of the Gender Reco…
Not Addressed
We reiterate our predecessor Committee’s recommendation for better guidance on the single-sex and separate-sex exceptions and urge the Government Equalities Office and Equality and Human Rights Commission to publish this guidance, using worked examples and case studies from organisations providing these services. We also strongly recommend that the Government Equalities …
Read more
We reiterate our predecessor Committee’s recommendation for better guidance on the single-sex and separate-sex exceptions and urge the Government Equalities Office and Equality and Human Rights Commission to publish this guidance, using worked examples and case studies from organisations providing these services. We also strongly recommend that the Government Equalities Office and Equality and Human Rights Commission urgently develop and publish guidance, in collaboration with trans rights groups, on best practice to provide trans and non-binary inclusive and specific services, including specifically relating to domestic violence and sexual abuse. This guidance should use worked examples and case studies from organisations providing these services.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government's response states its view on the appropriateness of diagnosis requirements in the GRA, which does not address the recommendation to publish guidance on single-sex/separate-sex exceptions and trans/non-binary inclusive services.
Read full response →
Government Equalities Office
20
Recommendation
Third report- Reform of the Gender Reco…
Deferred
We recommend that the Government Equalities Office conduct a review into the use of the occupational requirement exception and how it is currently being applied. This review should consider the role of the GRA and how it interacts with the Equality Act and employment laws, and make recommendations to strengthen …
Read more
We recommend that the Government Equalities Office conduct a review into the use of the occupational requirement exception and how it is currently being applied. This review should consider the role of the GRA and how it interacts with the Equality Act and employment laws, and make recommendations to strengthen protections for trans and gender non-conforming people at work. Measures of progress and targets must be set to reduce and eliminate gender-based discrimination in the workplace.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government redirected the recommendation for the GEO to conduct a review into occupational requirement exceptions, stating that the EHRC has committed to issuing separate guidance on these provisions. It did not commit to the broader scope of a review, making recommendations, or setting targets …
Read full response →
Government Equalities Office
21
Recommendation
Third report- Reform of the Gender Reco…
Acknowledged
Guidance on the application of the sports exception continues to be confused and inadequate, leaving many sports providers feeling unclear about its application. The Sports Council Equality Group has produced some guidance to try and bridge this gap. However, both the Government Equalities Office and Equality and Human Rights Commission …
Read more
Guidance on the application of the sports exception continues to be confused and inadequate, leaving many sports providers feeling unclear about its application. The Sports Council Equality Group has produced some guidance to try and bridge this gap. However, both the Government Equalities Office and Equality and Human Rights Commission have a responsibility to provide clarity in this area. We recommend that the EHRC and GEO work with the Sports Council Equality Group to publish supplementary guidance that clearly and correctly addresses some of the main concerns sporting bodies have in relation to this exception, including under what circumstances it is acceptable to use the sports exception. We believe it is absolutely essential that the integrity of women’s sport is maintained and not compromised, and that nothing should happen in this space which would undermine that. In addition, 76 Reform of the Gender Recognition Act the EHRC and GEO must work with trans rights groups and sports providers to develop clear, evidence-based guidance with practical examples for how to facilitate trans and gender non-conforming inclusive spaces in sports.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government notes that the EHRC is currently looking to update its guidance on single-sex exceptions in the Equality Act. However, it does not commit to the specific recommendation for EHRC and GEO to work with various groups to publish supplementary guidance or develop comprehensive …
Read full response →
Government Equalities Office
22
Recommendation
Third report- Reform of the Gender Reco…
Not Addressed
The conflation of the terms sex and gender in both the Gender Recognition Act and Equality Act has led to widespread confusion and disagreement. We welcome the Equality and Human Rights Commission guidance on sex and gender reassignment and believe it is clear in explaining the rights of those who …
Read more
The conflation of the terms sex and gender in both the Gender Recognition Act and Equality Act has led to widespread confusion and disagreement. We welcome the Equality and Human Rights Commission guidance on sex and gender reassignment and believe it is clear in explaining the rights of those who have acquired a GRC in relation to the protected characteristics in the Equality Act. However, there is more work to be done. The GEO should work to update the language in both acts in relation to sex and gender, ensuring consistency in the definitions used. It should be clear when an Act is referring to natal sex, legal sex and gender. The Government should also aim to update all official documents that conflate the terms sex and gender.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government reiterated its view that the position set out in September 2020 is appropriate and that GRA evidential requirements ensure a robust legal gender recognition process, but did not address the recommendation on updating language in acts and official documents.
Read full response →
Government Equalities Office
23
Recommendation
Third report- Reform of the Gender Reco…
Not Addressed
We recognise the importance of collecting and monitoring data on natal sex, especially in cases of equality monitoring. We also recognise the sensitives around collecting and monitoring data on natal sex and the distress it can cause trans and gender non-conforming people. The Government Equalities Office should work closely with …
Read more
We recognise the importance of collecting and monitoring data on natal sex, especially in cases of equality monitoring. We also recognise the sensitives around collecting and monitoring data on natal sex and the distress it can cause trans and gender non-conforming people. The Government Equalities Office should work closely with trans rights groups and researchers The Government Equalities Office should work closely with trans rights groups and researchers to develop clear guidelines around data collection in relation to sex and gender, with the aim of minimising such distress, particularly for publicly funded or mandated data such as the census. (Paragraph 181) Transgender Health
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government reiterated its view that the position set out in September 2020 is appropriate and that GRA evidential requirements ensure a robust legal gender recognition process, but did not address the recommendation on developing data collection guidelines.
Read full response →
Government Equalities Office
24
Recommendation
Third report- Reform of the Gender Reco…
Accepted in Part
We commend the work undertaken by NHS England to open more gender identity clinics and welcome the announcement of the opening of a further two pilot clinics. We are, however, concerned to learn that waiting times for these clinics continue to be lengthy. There also appears to be a lack …
Read more
We commend the work undertaken by NHS England to open more gender identity clinics and welcome the announcement of the opening of a further two pilot clinics. We are, however, concerned to learn that waiting times for these clinics continue to be lengthy. There also appears to be a lack of clarity from NHS England over whether these pilot clinics will continue to remain open long-term. We recommend that the GEO works closely with the Department for Health and Social Care and NHS England to ensure that NHS England maintain the five pilot gender identity clinics unless or until the time that more permanent facilities with greater capacity, geographical scope and powers can be established. No facility should be closed without another opening in its place to ensure waiting times are reduced. Given that NHS England has opened five pilot clinics in the last two years, the Equalities Minister should secure additional funding to ensure significant steps will be made over the next two years to reduce waiting list times. The Minister should work closely with NHS England to continue to open facilities in under-resourced areas to tackle lengthy waiting lists and provide other much needed services including mental health services. We would urge it to consider opening clinics in the West Midlands and the South West of England, given the lack of services in those regions.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government states NHSEI is committed to commissioning a new adult service model and evaluating pilot clinics to inform permanent commissioning. They are working to move services in the South West to a new model by 2023, and reference existing mental health funding and ongoing …
Read full response →
Government Equalities Office
25
Recommendation
Third report- Reform of the Gender Reco…
Accepted
NHS England should also consider more appropriate and effective responses and services to patients facing lengthy waiting list times than the current communications. This must include access to trans/gender non-conforming inclusive or specific mental health services. The GEO, DHSC and NHS England should provide this Committee Reform of the Gender …
Read more
NHS England should also consider more appropriate and effective responses and services to patients facing lengthy waiting list times than the current communications. This must include access to trans/gender non-conforming inclusive or specific mental health services. The GEO, DHSC and NHS England should provide this Committee Reform of the Gender Recognition Act 77 with annual updates on the progress of these developments, including the current pilot clinics, informing us of the impact they are having on waiting times and their targets to reduce them.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government accepted the recommendation, committing DHSC to provide annual updates on pilot clinics and their impact on waiting times. It outlined new pilot clinics for holistic care, including psychological services, established regional professional support services, and allocated an additional £500 million for mental health …
Read full response →
Government Equalities Office
26
Recommendation
Third report- Reform of the Gender Reco…
Not Addressed
There is undoubtedly an urgent need for more trained and specialist clinicians who have the knowledge and understanding to work in the growing number of gender identity clinics. We welcome NHS England’s funding of a programme in gender dysphoria medicine. However, we are concerned that NHS England do not have …
Read more
There is undoubtedly an urgent need for more trained and specialist clinicians who have the knowledge and understanding to work in the growing number of gender identity clinics. We welcome NHS England’s funding of a programme in gender dysphoria medicine. However, we are concerned that NHS England do not have enough specialist staff needed to run new clinics. We believe that there is a need to encourage NHS staff and medical students into this field in order to address the significant waiting times many people accessing these clinics face. The Department of Health and Social Care should work with NHS England to attract more trainee doctors to specialise in gender identity healthcare.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government's response did not address the recommendation for DHSC and NHS England to attract more trainee doctors to specialise in gender identity healthcare. Instead, it discussed the necessity and retention of the statutory declaration requirement for GRC applications.
Read full response →
Government Equalities Office
27
Conclusion
Third report- Reform of the Gender Reco…
Not Addressed
We are aware that the COVID-19 pandemic has made access to primary healthcare more difficult for everybody, including transgender and non-binary people. In her response to the Gender Recognition Act Consultation, the Minister for Women and Equalities argued that the most important concern for transgender people was the state of …
Read more
We are aware that the COVID-19 pandemic has made access to primary healthcare more difficult for everybody, including transgender and non-binary people. In her response to the Gender Recognition Act Consultation, the Minister for Women and Equalities argued that the most important concern for transgender people was the state of transgender healthcare. However, we have seen no evidence that the Government Equalities Office is working to improve transgender and non-binary people’s experience of primary healthcare.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government's response discusses the necessity of a statutory declaration for gender recognition and does not address the committee's concerns about the Government Equalities Office's work on transgender and non-binary primary healthcare.
Read full response →
Government Equalities Office
28
Recommendation
Third report- Reform of the Gender Reco…
Not Addressed
The Government Equalities Office and Department for Health and Social Care should develop a healthcare strategy for transgender and non-binary people within the next year. The strategy should include: • improved and mandatory training for GPs around treating trans and non- binary patients; • guidance for healthcare professionals, including how …
Read more
The Government Equalities Office and Department for Health and Social Care should develop a healthcare strategy for transgender and non-binary people within the next year. The strategy should include: • improved and mandatory training for GPs around treating trans and non- binary patients; • guidance for healthcare professionals, including how to communicate appropriately with patients who are trans or non-binary; • improved access to support services for trans and non-binary people. Both departments should set out how they will measure progress across each of these areas in order to improve the experiences of trans and non-binary people. (Paragraph 215) The LGBT Action Plan
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government's response defines the term 'spouse' and does not address the recommendation to develop a healthcare strategy for transgender and non-binary people.
Read full response →
Government Equalities Office
29
Recommendation
Third report- Reform of the Gender Reco…
Not Addressed
We welcome confirmation from the Department of Health and Social Care that the LGBT Action Plan is considered a point of reference for the Department. However, we are concerned that the Government Equalities Office appears to have abandoned it. This demonstrates how disjointed the Governments approach to LGBT+ issues is. …
Read more
We welcome confirmation from the Department of Health and Social Care that the LGBT Action Plan is considered a point of reference for the Department. However, we are concerned that the Government Equalities Office appears to have abandoned it. This demonstrates how disjointed the Governments approach to LGBT+ issues is. It is also concerning that the GEO is ignoring the valuable experiences and concerns of LGBT+ people across the UK. The Government’s own LGBT Advisory Panel made it clear that the commitments in the LGBT Action Plan should continue to be implemented, before it was disbanded. The Government should commit at the earliest possible opportunity to continuing the implementation of the LGBT Action Plan across all departments. It should also reinstate its LGBT Advisory Panel, to demonstrate willingness to implement the actions outlined in the Plan - driven by 78 Reform of the Gender Recognition Act the data from the National LGBT Survey. We call on the Government to write to this Committee outlining the next steps in this work and providing a timetable by which they hope to achieve it. (Paragraph 221) Non-binary Gender Recognition
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government's response defines the term 'spouse' and does not address the recommendation to commit to the LGBT Action Plan or reinstate the LGBT Advisory Panel.
Read full response →
Government Equalities Office
30
Recommendation
Third report- Reform of the Gender Reco…
Rejected
When the previous Government launched its consultation into the reform of the Gender Recognition Act, it explicitly stated that one of its aims was to gather evidence to further advance equality for non-binary and intersex people. The LGBT Action Plan also made a commitment to improve the Government’s understanding of …
Read more
When the previous Government launched its consultation into the reform of the Gender Recognition Act, it explicitly stated that one of its aims was to gather evidence to further advance equality for non-binary and intersex people. The LGBT Action Plan also made a commitment to improve the Government’s understanding of the issues faced by non-binary. The Government should clarify what the barriers are that prevent it from allowing non-binary people to be legally recognised. The Government should lay out reasons in writing to this Committee at the earliest possible opportunity, within a maximum of 12 weeks. The Equality and Human Rights Commission should undertake research in this area so that proposals to allow for legal recognition of non- binary people can be brought forward during this parliament. (Paragraph 226) Reform of the Gender Recognition Act 79
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government stated its position that no changes are needed to the Gender Recognition Act (GRA), asserting that UK law defines individuals as male or female on their birth certificate. While acknowledging its previous work exploring experiences of VSC and non-binary people, the government essentially …
Read full response →
Government Equalities Office