• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
Fair Play For Women

Fair Play For Women

  • Prison
  • Sport
  • GRA
  • Language
  • Changing rooms
  • Resources ▼
    • Take action! Here’s how
    • Key facts
    • UK law
    • Science
    • Sex vs gender
    • Consultation submissions
    • Materials
  • About Us ▼
    • Review of 2021
    • Our aim
    • Our beliefs
    • Our spokeswoman
    • Our history and achievements
    • Our supporters
    • News
      • Newspapers
      • TV Interviews
      • Radio interviews
    • Contact
    • Donate
You are here: Home / Language / Lies, damned lies and statistics: Census dirty tricks won’t stop us

Lies, damned lies and statistics: Census dirty tricks won’t stop us

28th February 2021 by FPFW

On Friday the 19th February we put the ONS on notice that we would seek an urgent judicial review if they did not withdraw their unlawful guidance accompanying “what is your sex” in the Census by Wednesday 22nd. But instead….

ONS pushed ahead regardless and secretly launched the on-line Census on Monday 22nd – a full 27 days before Census day on 21st March – despite knowing there were doubts over its legality.

Of course, ONS claim this was planned all along. Strange then how they didn’t tell anyone about this ‘launch’. None of their public communications have announced it. The public is still waiting for their on-line access codes to drop through their letter box in MARCH. Postcards have been arriving this week telling us to “Look out for your invitation pack in the post”. No mention that it has already gone live.

In a further attempt to thwart our legal challenge they then ran down the clock for another two days by waiting until the end of Wednesday to tell us. They refused to take the Guidance down saying it was now too late because the Census had already started.

“it is not now possible in practice for the relief you seek (withdrawal of the Guidance) to be granted in advance of the commencement of the Census (and it would clearly be inappropriate for any relief which amends relevant Guidance to be granted in the middle of the Census being taken)”.

They also refused to give a substantive response to our legal letter until Friday 26th saying they needed more time. Time is of the essence for this legal challenge. We must get into court by w/c 8th March to have a realistic prospect of the Guidance being declared unlawful and quashed before Census Day.

The ONS dirty tricks not only pushed that court date out of reach but has in effect pulled our deadline forward. Accepting census submissions a month early means the Guidance is, technically, already live so every single day counts. The longer the Guidance stays up the more difficult it will be to convince a judge to intervene and take it down.

We had two choices. Accept that we’d run out of time – let the Census run with the unlawful Guidance – and then seek a declaration from the Court that the Guidance had been unlawful.

Or we redouble our efforts and find a way to get into Court even sooner.

Undeterred, on Thursday we instructed top barrister, Jason Coppel QC, to find us a way to get this Guidance stopped.

By Friday we had lodged papers with the High Court asking for two things. We are now seeking an interim order next week to get the Guidance taken down, followed by an urgent hearing for a ruling on the lawfulness of the Guidance. The aim of that hearing will be that the Guidance is declared unlawful and quashed.

In other words, we want the Guidance to be taken down immediately on the basis that there is an unacceptable risk of unlawfulness in people answering the question on sex incorrectly. The Court would not be declaring the Guidance unlawful in this first stage; that would need to happen in Judicial Review later, possibly after the Census has run. But the practical result is that people would be answering the sex question without guidance telling them they could put their gender identity instead. The integrity of the sex question in the Census would be preserved.

The result of the ONS shenanigans over the last week will be to cost us all a lot more money. We must now stretch our crowd-funder target by at least another £20,000 and possibly more in the remaining days to cover the extra legal work. We have already incurred considerable costs to get this far. Needing to draft in a top QC ramps this up even further. You should be angry. We certainly are.

Public bodies like the ONS exist for the public good. Their decision-making process should be clear and transparent. They should be confident these decisions are lawful and never fear them being held up to the light during Judicial Review. This is their chance to show us their Guidance is lawful and that we are wrong. Instead they squirm and delay to keep their process hidden in the shadows. We will not allow this to happen.

How are ONS defending this claim?

In their substantive response sent to us on Friday, the ONS of course claimed it had ‘conducted extensive research and consulted’ over the sex question. Also, in a shocking display of arrogance, they blamed us for taking too long to bring the claim! Incredible seeing as it was them who had been dragging their heels by publishing the Guidance so late – leaving just ten days to spare before launching the Census online. We instructed solicitors on the very same day the Guidance was published, obtaining a barrister’s opinion within days and sending our pre-action letter (“PAP letter”) to ONS exactly one week later.

It’s likely they thought it was too late for anyone to mount a legal challenge after publishing at the last minute. They were wrong. They under-estimated our resolve and women’s commitment and determination. To them it’s just a few words in the small print. To us it’s the definition of the very thing that underpins our rights, women’s sex-based rights.

They wrote “If you seek urgent relief, it is incumbent on you and your clients to demonstrate that you have acted without delay. Your PAP letter was sent 7 days after the Guidance was published; in the context of the timetable you now suggest, that delay is unacceptable. Further, and more fundamentally, as you acknowledge in your letter your clients have known for over a year that the ONS has been contemplating Guidance which advised respondents to answer the Sex Question by reference to a concept of sex which was not “birth sex” as you have defined it. If you wished to challenge the legality of such an approach in principle it was open to you to do so as long ago as 2019, and incumbent on you to do so in time for that issue to be properly determined before Census day”

In other words, ONS thinks we should have known their stakeholder engagement was a sham. We should have raised and spent tens of thousands to get legal opinion and take them to court before any decision had even been made – just in case women get ignored again while they hold back publication until it’s too late to challenge what they did.

They also revealed some rather nonsensical beliefs. The policy capture runs deep. Apparently people can be more than one sex at a time!

They wrote “While for some questions (e.g. date of birth) there may only be one possible correct answer, for others, (e.g. ethnic group, or religion) the answer will be a matter of self-identification. In the case of sex, for most people the answer to the question “What is your sex?” will be straightforward and will accord with the sex recorded on their birth certificate at birth. For others, the question will be less straightforward. For example, the sex recorded on their birth certificate may not correspond with that which is recorded on a gender recognition certificate or other legal identity documents they hold. In such a case, the respondent might reasonably give an answer which did not correspondent with the sex recorded on their birth certificate at birth”.

The aim of guidance is to help someone know which answer to pick. What’s the point in guidance that doesn’t narrow it down? There are only two options to choose from after all. The ONS’s guidance renders itself useless by leaving trans people none the wiser about which of their documents they should refer to. The Guidance doesn’t guide! It’s not fit for purpose and needs taking down.

It’s a nonsense to suggest the new sex written on an identity document should override the sex we were actually born  – after nothing more than printing off a template letter from the internet and getting a GP to sign it. That’s how easy it is. Our sex isn’t something we can pick and choose. It’s a fundamental demographic variable that determines our material reality and needs. It must be taken seriously.

Government decided – after a long public consultation – that sex should NOT be a matter of self-identification. ONS can’t simply ignore that and push through its own version of sex self-ID regardless.

The fight continues

Next week is crunch time. The Judge has given ONS until Monday to mount its defence and then a decision on the date for the interim hearing will be made. Due to the urgent nature of the case it should be within days. On that day the Judge will decide whether or not to grant the interim order forcing ONS to remove the Guidance. By the end of next week, with luck, it should be gone.

Sex matters. Words matter. If the meaning of the word sex is lost, if it gets redefined to something else, we lose the language we need to speak about and fight for our rights; women’s sex-based rights.

https://www.crowdfunder.co.uk/sexinthecensus2021

DONATE NOW

 

Read more:

Mail On Sunday: Census chiefs launch survey a month early

Why are women fighting back against the Census

Shoddy research used by ONS to justify changing the definition of sex in the Census

Legal grounds: FPFW v ONS

Why it matters: The Census must collect data on the sex we are born.

 

 

Filed Under: Data, Judicial Review, Language

Primary Sidebar

Categories

  • Biological sex
  • Children
  • Gender Identity
  • Male violence
  • Scottish GRA reforms
  • Silencing women
  • Policy guidance

Our materials

  • Our factsheets
  • Our short films and animations
  • Our memes
  • Our research

Our latest articles

  • Press regulator is failing women with approach to transgender coverage
  • Take Action: Say NO to letting Sex Self-ID in through the back door.
  • Women’s cycling race saved after campaigns raise public support
  • How transgender inclusion leads to female exclusion
  • Sex-based rights groups make formal bid to sponsor women’s cycle race

Archives

Footer

Prisons, crime and protecting women

  • The facts about transgender prisoners
  • Prisons timeline – how did we get here?
  • Karen White & prison review
  • Sex attacks in female prisons
  • Refuge shelters deeply worried
  • How do women in prison feel about sharing with transgender prisoners?
  • Can you believe what you read about sexual and violent crimes?
  • The judicial review of prisons policy
  • Factsheets

Sport and the human body

  • Biological sex differences
  • Chromosomes, sex and gender
  • Sport policy – what now for UK sports?
  • Guidelines for single-sex sport policy
  • The science and statistics behind the transgender debate
  • Safeguarding in sport still matters
  • Male inclusion leads to female exclusion
  • What you can do

Making policy and the law

  • The Equality Act 2010 and women’s rights
  • GRA reform
  • Advice and guidance for policy makers
  • Changing room policy advice
  • What can I do now?
  • Take Action: Say NO to letting Sex Self-ID in through the back door.
  • Public opinion on the tension between women’s rights and trans demands

© 2022 · Fair Play For Women

This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt out if you wish. Read More

Accept Decline Cookie Settings
I consent to the use of following cookies:
Cookie Declaration About Cookies
Necessary (2) Marketing (1) Analytics (4) Preferences (0) Unclassified (4)
Necessary cookies help make a website usable by enabling basic functions like page navigation and access to secure areas of the website. The website cannot function properly without these cookies.
Name Domain Purpose Expiry Type
wpl_user_preference fairplayforwomen.com WP GDPR Cookie Consent Preferences 1 year HTTP
YSC youtube.com YouTube session cookie. 52 years HTTP
Marketing cookies are used to track visitors across websites. The intention is to display ads that are relevant and engaging for the individual user and thereby more valuable for publishers and third party advertisers.
Name Domain Purpose Expiry Type
VISITOR_INFO1_LIVE youtube.com YouTube cookie. 6 months HTTP
Analytics cookies help website owners to understand how visitors interact with websites by collecting and reporting information anonymously.
Name Domain Purpose Expiry Type
_ga fairplayforwomen.com Google Universal Analytics long-time unique user tracking identifier. 2 years HTTP
_gid fairplayforwomen.com Google Universal Analytics short-time unique user tracking identifier. 1 days HTTP
vuid vimeo.com Vimeo tracking cookie 2 years HTTP
IDE doubleclick.net Google advertising cookie used for user tracking and ad targeting purposes. 2 years HTTP
Preference cookies enable a website to remember information that changes the way the website behaves or looks, like your preferred language or the region that you are in.
We do not use cookies of this type.
Unclassified cookies are cookies that we are in the process of classifying, together with the providers of individual cookies.
Name Domain Purpose Expiry Type
_gat_UA-109881507-1 fairplayforwomen.com --- Session ---
GASessionCookie fairplayforwomen.com --- Session ---
rtc linkedin.com --- Session ---
_wpfuuid fairplayforwomen.com --- 11 years ---
Cookies are small text files that can be used by websites to make a user's experience more efficient. The law states that we can store cookies on your device if they are strictly necessary for the operation of this site. For all other types of cookies we need your permission. This site uses different types of cookies. Some cookies are placed by third party services that appear on our pages.
Cookie Settings