Mick Hartley

And a Times editorial:

Thursday marks a year since the Supreme Court delivered one of its most important rulings to date. In declaring that sex should be defined purely by biology, the court injected clarity and common sense into an issue beset by trans ideology. The court sided with For Women Scotland, a campaign group, which argued that protections based on sex should apply only to biological females, and against the Scottish government, which argued such rights should be extended to biological men describing themselves as women.

It was hoped that this ruling would mark the end of the “gender wars” that for years have been fought by trans activists. Instead, the past 12 months have brought only dithering by a ­government that appears reluctant to accept and implement the court’s verdict. Despite the lack of legal ambiguity in what defines a “man” and a “woman”, the education secretary Bridget Phillipson, who doubles as equalities minister, has yet to publish official guidance on how the court’s ruling should be put into operation. It is remarkable and disturbing that ministers see nothing wrong in frustrating the will of Britain’s highest court.

Especially given Starmer’s near-obsession with following the law.

The government says it must “get this right”, but in reality it appears to be happier doing nothing. It is to be regretted that Ms Phillipson has failed to respect the law and publish guidance in good time. This is political foot-dragging of the highest order. The result is that organisations in the public and private sectors may be breaking the law while awaiting instruction on, for example, the provision of lavatory facilities. This is especially concerning for institutions such as hospitals and leisure centres, which look to Whitehall for guidelines.