Bridget Phillipson hits out at ‘deeply unpleasant targeting’ of trans people in wake of Supreme Court ruling
The Minister for Women and Equalities hit out at the “deeply unpleasant targeting” of transgender people following the Supreme Court ruling on biological sex, but insisted the government’s position was “the right place to be”.
Bridget Phillipson made the remarks in her first appearance before the Women and Equalities Committee since the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) published its updated guidance on single-sex spaces last month.
The law, which has been heavily criticized by trans campaign groups and charities, confirmed that a service must be used on the basis of biological sex to be classed as single-gender under the Equality Act, as the Supreme Court ruled in 2025.
This means single-sex toilets, changing rooms, hospital wards and shelters should be used according to the gender a person was born with, rather than the gender they identify with.
Ms Phillipson admitted the guidance would not satisfy everyone and said she expected further debate, legal challenges and scrutiny, but also acknowledged the wider debate had worsened.
Appearing before the committee on Wednesday, she also suggested the rights of women and trans people should not be in conflict.
In her strongest tone yet on the issue, the Minister for Women and Equalities said: “I think it’s a clear statement that, whatever my intentions, this issue is not going to go away in terms of setting the rules. I would like us to be able to move forward on that basis.”
“The reason I want this to happen is not just a dry legal debate or draft law, but in two important respects, firstly, I do not want trans people to be on the front pages of newspapers all the time.
“I don’t want transgender people to be constantly belittled on social media for being who they are and wanting to live the life they want.
“But I also want women to be able to access services and for service providers to be able to offer the services they believe are necessary to women who experience male violence on a single-gender basis. I don’t think those two things should be at odds with each other.”
He added: “My belief has always been that we can deliver appropriate single-sex services, whether it’s the rape crisis, women’s refuges, good access to sports for girls, which I don’t think means we should now be targeting people in a very unpleasant way who just want to live their lives without harming anyone.”
Ms Phillipson also reiterated her belief that the new regulation provides clarity for service providers such as gyms, leisure centers and cafes.
He told MPs: “The EHRC wanted to make sure that the bill it was putting forward provided everyone with what they needed, and although I understand that the position we have come to – it will not satisfy everyone in terms of what it offers – I believe that is the right place for it to be and that is why I have introduced the legislation on behalf of the government.”
The minister said he expected “there will continue to be further debate, challenge, scrutiny, legal challenge as this is a very controversial area”, adding: “This will be the case no matter what is said in the draft law.”
While Ms Phillipson understood that organisations, particularly smaller ones without access to large budgets, might find this area “difficult”, she said she believed the draft legislation “delivered what was needed within the scope of protected features”.
This comes just weeks after the government was accused of imitating Donald Trump’s America; Newly published guidance has confirmed that single-sex services should be based on biological sex, sparking concerns that transgender people will be pushed out of public life.
The Trans+ Solidarity Alliance (TSA) warned that this would be a “Section 28 moment for the Labor government that defines its legacy on LGBTQ+ rights” and said it was “worryingly similar to the US toilet ban condemned by the UK foreign office in 2016”.
They added that more than 100 MPs had signed an early day motion (EDM) to reject the law, describing it as “unfair, unworkable and unacceptable”.
The group said: “We hope this demonstrates the strength of feeling in Parliament on this issue and helps force a rethink on trans equality.”
EDM may be introduced by MPs to highlight objection to an issue, but this does not automatically lead to a debate or vote on the issue.
