Commons Sense

House of Commons · Ministers' Questions

Sports Governing Bodies: Supreme Court Judgment

Thursday 3 July 2025 · 1 question

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

At a glance

Answered 0 Partly answered 1 Not answered 0

Key points

  • Jonathan Hinder asked the minister about discussions with sports governing bodies regarding compliance with the Supreme Court judgment in the For Women Scotland case.
  • The minister responded that the government has been working closely with sporting bodies to support them in implementing the recent Supreme Court judgment.
  • The minister emphasized that sporting bodies need to develop policies that protect fairness and safety, considering the importance of biology in women's sport.

Topics (select to filter)

Questions & Answers

Q1 Jonathan Hinder Lab Pendle and Clitheroe
Context

The Supreme Court issued a ruling in the case of For Women Scotland v. The Scottish Ministers, which has implications for sports governing bodies' policies regarding women's participation.

Question

What discussions have you had with sports governing bodies on ensuring they are compliant with the Supreme Court judgment in the case of For Women Scotland v. The Scottish Ministers? More than two months after the ruling clarified the law, there remains a long list of sporting bodies that are denying fairness to women and girls, including Parkrun and weightlifting and wrestling. Does my right hon. Friend agree that there is no need to wait for further guidance and that these bodies should take the advice of the Prime Minister and get on with it?

Answer from The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Lisa Nandy)

We have been working closely with sporting bodies to support them as they implement the recent judgment by the Supreme Court. We are clear that when it comes to women’s sport, biology matters and our sporting bodies need to come up with policies that protect fairness and safety while ensuring everyone has the opportunity to participate in some capacity.

Partly answered

Not addressed: The specific ask was for immediate compliance without waiting for further guidance, but the answer did not explicitly commit to this action.

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Get updates like this by email