Lucy Powell has called for MPs to vote on guidance governing single sex spaces following this year’s landmark Supreme Court ruling on biological sex.

Ms Powell, who is standing against Bridget Phillipson in the contest to replace Angela Rayner as Labour deputy leader, told members the party had got some of its language around Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) guidance “not right”.

Sky News understands this means Ms Powell would like to see MPs vote on the guidance.

Labour conference latest: PM warns of ‘fight for soul of country’

The Manchester Central MP, who was sacked as Commons leader in Sir Keir Starmer’s reshuffle, said she felt “really strongly” that there needed to be a “robust and transparent parliamentary conversation” about the guidance issued by the commission following the Supreme Court ruling that the legal definition of a woman is based on biological sex.

Addressing members on the Monday evening of Labour’s conference in Liverpool, Ms Powell said she would be continuing to “support the trans community which I represent in my constituency very well and have done for a long time”.

“I’m a woman, I’m a feminist and I see absolutely no contradiction in being a woman and also supporting the trans community to feel included and to have their rights as well,” she said.

“That is something I will strongly support as deputy leader in all the ways that I can and I’m happy to work with you on that.”

👉Listen to Politics At Sam And Anne’s on your podcast app👈

Her comments suggest the debate around transgender rights could play a more prominent role in the deputy leadership race, given Ms Phillipson serves as the women and equalities minister, as well as education secretary.

The debate has proved fractious and controversial within Labour, with prominent MP Rosie Duffield quitting the party to sit as an independent in part over Sir Keir’s stance on the issue.

The EHRC, the body responsible for equality and non-discrimination laws, is understood to have sent its guidance to Ms Phillipson, who is currently reviewing it and will decide whether to approve it.

The guidance is expected to say that venues offering single-sex facilities will have to exclude transgender people, including if they have a gender recognition certificate or have undergone gender reassignment surgery.

It has been welcomed by some women’s rights groups and campaigners, but others, including Stonewall and some businesses, have criticised the guidance as “confusing” and “unworkable”.

Read more:
Why sacking Lucy Powell might come back to haunt Starmer
Unite accused of ‘stitch up’ over deputy leadership contest

Speaking on Monday, Ms Powell said: “I think we have got some of the language not right on this and particularly around some of the guidance that is coming forward.

“I really strongly feel that we need a robust and transparent parliamentary conversation about that because when we are looking at applying the law as parliamentarians, we should have a say in that and that is something I will be pushing for as well.”

Sir Keir welcomed the “real clarity” of the Supreme Court ruling when it was delivered in April, and said it allowed “those that have got to draw up guidance to be really clear about what that guidance should say”.

Ms Phillipson also told the Commons the judgment brought “clarity and confidence for women”, but added that the government would “support the rights of women and trans people, now and always”.

Elsewhere at an event with members, Ms Powell argued there needed to be a “cultural reset” in Downing Street following a series of political and policy mishaps.

“We need a cultural reset here, and that’s one of the things that members have been asking me about. We seem to be relying on a smaller and smaller group of people who have a similar view of the world, and I don’t think that’s healthy or strong. Having me as deputy leader can help with that cultural reset we need.”

Ms Powell also argued her status as a backbencher gave her an advantage in the contest.

She said she “profoundly disagreed” with Ms Phillipson’s claim that it was a “risk” to have someone outside the cabinet as deputy leader.

“The deputy leader is elected by members. I don’t think the first hurdle is that you have to be anointed by the leader. The deputy leader is a party role not a government role.

“I think it’s a value added proposition that I’m putting on the table right now.”

On its own terms, this was one of Sir Keir Starmer’s most successful moments since becoming Labour leader in 2020. 

Just in the nick of time, the prime minister delivered a speech that will steady his position in the party and arm Labour activists with new, clearer dividing lines with Reform UK. There’s nothing like finding and cauterising an enemy to get the crowd back on side.

He attacked “snake oil merchants” on the left and right – allowing some to question whether that is a category which includes Andy Burnham.

Politics latest: PM says Farage ‘doesn’t like Britain’ as he targets Reform

And he worked out his principle policy attack on Reform UK: the plan to rip up the settled status of people who have lived in Britain for decades.

In a move that one senior Labour figure described as a “One Nation Labour” credo, he gave a more credible account of his credentials as a champion of working people than he has managed in the past by invoking his family.

👉Listen to Politics At Sam And Anne’s on your podcast app👈

Rather than pretend that the Oxford-educated barrister could play the role of a working-class hero, he pointed to the struggles of his father, brother and sister to emphasise he understands the lives of those outside the north London seat he represents.

The politics are striking. Sir Keir’s team tell me that the speech was aimed at those in Middle England who are tempted by Reform UK.

But in an apparent change, it was also a speech that went down well with the soft left, who have been disappointed by Sir Keir for much of the year.

Rather than moving into Reform UK territory, he spelt out why they were wrong in a set piece that might succeed in its aim of stopping the drift away of voters from Labour to the Lib Dems, Greens and others on the left.

Yet for all of its success, the biggest issue in British politics was ignored. There continues to be a £20-30 billion black hole, which will define this year in British politics, yet this was not mentioned at all.

There was a brief sort of acknowledgement of the need for fiscal rules – a lack of financial responsibility would hit working people, he argued.

Read more:
Was this one of the great Labour conference speeches?
Renew Britain – but did it renew Starmer?

He also noted that businesses paid a lot in tax, though it was not clear that this amounted to a promise not to tax them further. But there was none of the pitch rolling for what continues to look like a massive moment at the budget on 26 November.

Cabinet ministers say that there was a more urgent task of shoring him up and setting a direction to be done, that trumped the need to dwell on this impending problem.

The issue is whether it marks a wider change in his premiership. The challenge for Sir Keir has always been whether he can execute policy that will change people’s lives.

His approach – the high-level chairman rather than interventionist chief executive – does not always yield the real change of his rhetoric. This will need to change for this government to truly be a success.

“I am proud to be Scottish. I don’t want them here.”

Standing on the balcony of his flat in Glasgow, George drapes the saltire Scottish flag as he explains his anti-immigration stance.

“We can’t afford to keep all these people coming in,” he says. “There’s too many people coming in.”

George, who lives on the Wyndford estate in Glasgow’s Maryhill, is not alone.

Warning: This report contains material some may find offensive.

Streets across the city are filling with white and blue flags hanging from lampposts.

Immigration has not been centre stage in Scottish politics for many years – but the mood appears to be shifting.

Glasgow is the frontline of the UK’s immigration system, with more arrivals than anywhere else.

With community tensions spiking and accommodation costs rising to £4.5m a month, the city’s leaders are demanding a pause on relocations.

Glasgow’s financial burden spirals

In 1999, the city signed up to the UK’s “dispersal” system, which saw asylum seekers relocated by the Home Office in exchange for cash.

It was a bygone era, when Glasgow’s high-rise housing was in abundance and modern pressures were less acute.

The landscape has changed drastically, with many tower blocks flattened amid regeneration.

Once an asylum seeker is given the right to stay in the UK, they become a refugee and switch from being the responsibility of the Home Office to the local authority.

While immigration is controlled by Westminster, housing and healthcare are among the issues dealt with by the Scottish government.

Scotland’s homelessness legislation means councils must house anyone without a home.

It is a more generous policy than in England, where usually only those with “priority need” are given a roof over their head.

It is suggested the Scottish policy is drawing people to Glasgow at the same time the Home Office is “mass processing” a backlog of asylum cases and granting some the right to stay in the UK.

Latest figures show Glasgow was the local authority with the highest proportion of housed asylum seekers at 59 per 10,000 inhabitants (a total of 3,716).

City officials argue the issues are coming together to create a crisis, with the financial burden spiralling.

Councillors are pleading for more financial assistance from Westminster, but so far that has not been forthcoming.

‘We will be the underdogs’

Scotland has traditionally been seen as a left-leaning nation where inward migration is welcomed.

The tourism industry relies heavily on people coming to work, and it is no secret that Brexit caused issues for hospitality staffing.

The issue has not dominated the public conversation in Scotland, but polls suggest, for the first time in a long while, it is a rising concern.

It is still not a priority for most Scots – but it is beginning to seep into the narrative.

Up the road from where George lives in Maryhill, we come across an 84-year-old woman who asks us not to show her face on camera.

Immigration is “getting out of control”, she says.

“It looks like they are going to overspill us,” she says. “We will be the underdogs.”

When challenged on her evidence for her claims, she responds: “I don’t have any evidence”.

Asked what she means by “they”, she says: “All the ones that are coming in, especially Muslims.”

She said she was not racist but was instead saying “just truth” and “my opinion”.

We meet Audrey Cameron, a mother whose children have additional learning needs.

She told me: “I’ve got an older son who lives with me who can’t get a house, but yet you come in to this country, and you get a house no bother. I know people say they don’t, but they do.

“There is more black and every other colour than there is white.”

When challenged that others may think a multicultural society is something that should be welcomed, Ms Cameron says: “We don’t have the infrastructure for it.

“We don’t have the housing. Even trying to get a doctor’s appointment is a nightmare. There has to be a limit.

“There are too many immigrants in this area. They are not spread out. They are all congregated.”

‘They are not stealing your jobs’

Andy Sirel, a leading immigration lawyer and co-founder of Just Right Scotland, tells Sky News that misinformation is fuelling the public discourse and politicians need to act.

He says: “When a person is in the United Kingdom, they are not allowed to work, they are not allowed to claim benefits, they are not stealing your jobs.

“If they are in a hotel, which they don’t want to be in, they are on £9 a week. It is simply not true the narrative that is being put out.

“The issue is being used as a scapegoat by various political actors.

“It is predicated on immigration, or higher levels of immigration, being why the standard of living has dropped and the reason public services are suffering, which is simply not the case.”

The town with deep divides over immigration

Falkirk is a mid-size town with a population of approximately 150,000, around 30 miles from Glasgow city centre.
It has become a flashpoint for protest between pro and anti-immigration groups.

A dilapidated and crumbling old hotel, the Cladhan, is home to dozens of mostly men in their 20s, 30s and 40s awaiting their asylum cases being heard.

The Home Office pays for accommodation, meals and financial allowances for asylum seekers, given the rules banning them seeking employment.

A brick was thrown through a window recently in an attack Scotland’s First Minister John Swinney branded “despicable”.

During a rally outside the hotel, Sky News filmed one man performing a Nazi salute, while a banner was held up saying “Kill ‘Em All, Let God Sort ‘Em Out”.

Others, from the community group Falkirk For All, chanted “refugees are welcome here”.

“We are standing up against the scapegoating of refugees. [We are] standing up against racism,” Georgia Henderson from the group said.

“We have been shocked by what we saw. We are highly motivated to turn up and protect the people of the hotel.”

Dr Teresa Piacentini, an expert in migration from Glasgow University, said many people are misinformed when discussing this issue.

She said: “Claiming asylum is a right. To claim asylum is not to do something illegal. You have a legal entitlement to claim asylum.

“People that are being held in the asylum hotels have claimed asylum so are exercising a right to be here. And while their asylum claim is being processed, they are here legally.

“Illegal has become a convenient catch-all phrase that doesn’t actually reveal the complexity and nuance behind it.”

Tensions in Falkirk have been heightened since a former resident of the asylum hotel raped a 15-year-old girl in the town.

Asylum seeker Sadeq Nikzad, 29, was jailed for nine years in June.

We spoke to two men who are currently living in the hotel after being bussed up to Falkirk from London.

Nechirvan, 31, arrived in March 2024 after crossing the English Channel.

He says he fled Iraq and had been living in Europe, mostly Germany, for 10 years before making the journey to the UK.

He claims he “couldn’t stay” on the continent any more because “they are deporting people”.

Asked whether he understands the anger from some that it is mostly young men entering on small boats, he says: “We are not safe in our country.

“It is not easy. Not easy for family to cross the water. That’s why they not bring the family.”

Nechirvan describes sleepless nights as protests ramp up outside the asylum hotel.

Another asylum seeker living in Falkirk, who did not want to be identified, says he came to the UK from West Africa.

In response to rising tensions, he says: “I don’t blame anybody. People have some valid reasons to feel angry but what is important is that we are all human beings.”

“You cannot put everyone in one category, classing everyone as racist,” he adds.

“What I know is people have valid reasons, but not everyone in the hotel is bad. Some of the people if you listen to what they went through, you’d sympathise with them.

“You may have your own reasons for doing what you are doing but let’s just live peacefully.”

The Home Office told Sky News it is attempting to reduce the number of people in hotels.

A spokesman said: “This government inherited a broken asylum and immigration system. We are taking practical steps to turn that chaos around – including doubling asylum decision-making to clear the backlog left by the previous government and reducing the number of people in hotels by 6,000 in the first half of 2025.

“We continue to work with local councils, NGOs and other stakeholders to ensure any necessary assistance is provided for those individuals who are granted refugee status.”