0:00
How did it get to this point, Andrea
0:03
When did the rot set in? Well, I think a really key point
0:07
and I think that many in public life didn't realise it at the time
0:12
but I remember it very well. You've both been talking about your age this morning
0:17
but I remember this very well back in 2004, the Gender Recognition Act
0:23
It really then certified in law that, well, it gave you a certificate that if you were a biological man or woman that was living out in the opposite sex for two years, that you could then have a government certification that said you were the opposite sex
0:42
You could even rewrite your passport and your birth certificate. Well, that's actually putting fiction into a legal system, something that isn't true into a legal system
0:51
And then you begin to create all sorts of problems. And this case really was the interface between that piece of legislation, which says in law that a man is a woman or a woman is a man
1:01
It's a piece of legal fiction, but it's a certificate vis-a-vis the Equality Act
1:08
And I think the judges yesterday were also keen to stress, and I think this is something that we will have to be mindful of
1:16
And I think they were keen to stress this, that the discrimination law still is upheld with regard to those that identify as trans
1:27
So there is a sense in which the judges were saying this is not to pitch one group against the other
1:33
discrimination still applies to them. But a biological man and a woman and a man
1:38
within the purposes of the Equality Act is a biological man and a biological woman
1:43
And then there is this category of trans, which also must not be discriminated against
1:48
is what they were saying
