Seòmar agus comataidhean

The Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992 state that changing rooms

“shall not be suitable unless they include separate facilities for, or separate use of facilities by, men and women where necessary for reasons of propriety”.

It is the Scottish Government’s duty to ensure that all public bodies comply with such regulations. However, we have seen female nurses and female police officers being forced to share changing facilities with biologically male colleagues. Why are the health boards and Police Scotland not complying with the regulations?

Thank you.

You are absolutely right that we should not discriminate against anybody. I would like to dive into what you said about the policies. With regard to the issues that arise in relation to cases such as the police searching somebody or someone in the NHS changing in front of a biological male—or a trans woman, I should say—do you think that the law is not clear enough, or is the problem with the policies and guidance? As I said to Rohini Sharma Joshi, there is a lot of confusion out there, and—whether it is in the police, the NHS or wherever—someone does one thing and thinks that they are obeying the law, but someone else does something else and thinks that they are obeying the law. Everybody is very confused.

I think that people from all backgrounds, whatever they believe in, feel that they are in a position in which their performance on the public sector equality duty is not what it should be, because the law is not clear. Do you think that everyone is interpreting it in their own way? Should the Scottish Government be doing more to provide clarity through guidance or policy on the issue?

I agree that it is not just about being a woman of colour and the only minority in the group. I have voiced that because women of colour have come to me, but other women and girls have come to me, too. It is not just about faith and religion; it is about decency.

I want to probe this a little more, because I know that you work on the Scottish ethnic minority older people forum. I also know that sometimes you may not be able to speak directly on behalf of Age Scotland because—and I am going to be honest when I say this—there is fear about talking about these issues in a lot of organisations. Could you give your personal view?

I know the sort of people—I am going to respectfully call them aunties and uncles—who come to forum meetings and do really good work. You mentioned that earlier, and I have also heard about them bringing community groups together so that they can respond to many of the issues that we have spoken about today.

I certainly know that there are no unisex toilets in a gurdwara, a mosque or a mandir. There are toilets for males and females, and there is sometimes another toilet that can be used by non-binary or disabled people—or whatever the need is at the time. Do you feel, in the religions that we and other faiths practise—again, religion is a protected characteristic—that it is quite clear how we achieve a balance in that regard with other characteristics under the Equality Act 2010, in terms of single-sex services and biological males and females?

Does anybody else want to come in on that question? It appears not.

My next question is for Jill Wood. Do you think that lesbian clubs and associations with 25 or more members should be able to exclude all males, including those with gender recognition certificates?

You would not be able to comment on the issue.

The inclusion of single-sex spaces and services is absolutely vital for women, including women from BAME and religious backgrounds. During the passage of the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill, I highlighted that many religious women do not feel comfortable being touched by biologically male doctors or nurses who are performing examinations such as smear tests or breast examinations.

As our witnesses will know, the national health service employs many women from BAME backgrounds. Now, they will also be made to feel uncomfortable—especially given what happened to Sandie Peggie and how she has been treated—changing in front of a biological male. Doing that would mean that they would break their religion, which, by the way, is also a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010. Would that mean that all those women would have to go through a tribunal?

I need to ask about this, because I do not understand it. On the one hand, the public are given separate rooms for prayers but, on the other hand, single-sex facilities are taken away. That defeats the purpose of promoting equality. You will know that women of faith need to use those facilities before their prayers, without the presence of a biological male. Should it be mandatory for all public bodies to offer single-sex spaces and services?

Enough on what I have just asked about: enforcement activities.

Who do you feel is not doing their job?

Thank you, Rohini. You are absolutely right to say that it is up to the public sector. Again, we are here talking about the public sector duty, and it is important that it is clear so that people can understand it. The issues of dignity and respect are relevant not only to Muslim women; they are relevant to all women and girls.

I have one more question, which is for Vic Valentine. Do you accept that policies based around gender self-identification potentially open up employers and service providers to discrimination claims on the basis of sex and religion or belief?