Gender Recognition Bill [Lords]

---

[back to previous text]

Dr. Harris: I had not planned to speak to the hon. Gentleman's new clause, but to save time I identify myself with all that he has said. What a pleasure it has been to serve under you, Mrs. Roe, and Mr. Taylor, and to engage with both Ministers who have served on the Committee. Government Back Benchers have felt able to contribute to debate in a way that we do not always see. In fact, we very rarely see that.

I also thank those on the Opposition Benches for the way in which they have introduced their business. In particular, I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Teignbridge and the hon. Member for Daventry, who has exercised his duties in his usual polite and apposite way. I also thank other members of the Committee, including the hon. Member for South-West Bedfordshire, without whose contribution the Committee would not have been the same. I think that there is still more to come from him. I save other remarks for Third Reading.

Mr. Lammy: It would be remiss of me if I did not thank my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Work and Pensions. On Second Reading, some important questions were raised about pensions. Those issues did not arise in the other place. I am grateful for the way in which my hon. Friend dealt with them in her usual way to—I think—the satisfaction of the Committee.

I also put on record my thanks for the work of the Joint Committee on Human Rights, and particularly the work of my hon. Friends the Members for Birmingham, Selly Oak and for St. Helens, South (Mr. Woodward) and of the hon. Member for Oxford, West and Abingdon.

Mr. Boswell: I think that we are still in the middle of debating my new clause. As it would be ungracious if I did not do so, I also thank the Under-Secretary of State for Work and Pensions. She threw light on an area that most of us prefer not to know too much about, and even those who know a bit about it know what we do not know.

Column Number: 218

This has been a constructive Committee. We have exchanged pleasantries, but in this case—if not quite always—we have meant them. In the spirit of what has been said to date, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the motion.

Motion and clause, by leave, withdrawn.

Ms Bridget Prentice (Lewisham, East) (Lab): On a point of order, Mrs. Roe. On the basis that everybody is congratulating and thanking everybody else, I wonder whether it would be appropriate at this time for me to thank my opposite number, the hon. Member for Upminster (Angela Watkinson), for the charming and co-operative way in which she has helped us through the Committee? When the Bill returns to the Floor of the House, she will not be dealing with it, as she has moved on to greater things. I hope that the Committee will be appreciative of the work that she has done here and wish her well in her new post.

The Chairman: That is not a point of order, but I am sure that the hon. Member for Upminster has heard what has been said.

New Clause 6

Changing and washing facilities

'Nothing in this Act shall prejudice the rights of the management of facilities where there are gender specific changing and washing areas, such as showers and public baths, to regulate their procedures as they see fit, providing reasonable provision is made for transsexuals.'.—[Andrew Selous.]

Brought up, and read the First time.

Andrew Selous: I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.

We have only three minutes left and I will be brief, as I would like to get a response from the Minister. At the end of the clause stand part debate on clause 19, the Minister spoke about balancing the rights of different sections in our society. The clause is about sports changing facilities and showers where there are no cubicles and no physical separation, such as in the armed services. I wonder whether the Minister has had any conversations with the Ministry of Defence on that point.

I served in the Army for 12 years and my concern is that a small minority could cause needless offence. I stress immediately that the majority of transsexuals would not want to do that, but there was a recent example along those lines in Northamptonshire, of which the Minister will be aware. It is a relevant issue. My concern is to make sure that the rights of third parties are respected. If the Minister does not do that, we could have a backlash. It could cause resentment that would achieve the reverse of what he is trying to do under the Bill.

Mr. Lammy: The armed forces give detailed guidance for dealing with transsexual members. It will come as no surprise to the hon. Gentleman that the Government oppose the new clause. We discussed

Column Number: 219

many of the issues on Thursday. We believe that there is no reason to require transsexual people to use separate changing or washing facilities.

Andrew Selous: That is not the purpose of the new clause; the Minister is completely misrepresenting it. Transsexual people should use the facilities appropriate to their adopted gender. The new clause addresses only those circumstances in which deep offence may be caused to other people if there is no cubicle separation. Will he address that point, and not another one?

Column Number: 220

Mr. Lammy: I thought that I was addressing that point. As I said, we had extensive discussion—

It being Five o'clock, The Chairman proceeded, pursuant to Sessional Order D relating to programming [28 June 2001, as amended on 28 October 2001] and the Order of the Committee [9 March], to put forthwith the Question already proposed from the Chair.

Question put and negatived.

Bill, as amended, to be reported.

Committee rose at Five o'clock.

The following Members attended the Committee:
Roe, Mrs. Marion (Chairman)
Bayley, Hugh
Boswell, Mr.
Davies, Geraint
Eagle, Maria
Harris, Dr. Evan
Jones, Lynne
Lammy, Mr.
McDonagh, Siobhain
Prentice, Bridget
Selous, Andrew
Watkinson, Angela
Woodward, Mr.
Younger-Ross, Richard

 

---

Prepared 16 March 2004