Recommendations & Conclusions
15 items
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
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
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
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
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
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