I beg to move,

That this House has considered Pride Month.

It is a privilege to open this debate on behalf of the Government as we mark Pride Month, and it is a real honour to do so this year as the Minister for Equalities. I have spoken before at the Dispatch Box about growing up in the shadow of section 28, and what my teenage self would think about my standing here today. The life I have today as a proud lesbian, a Member of Parliament, a wife and a mother simply would not have been possible without the progress that was fought for, won and secured in this House.

In this House, it was often a Labour Government who paved the way. A Labour Government repealed section 28, a Labour Government ended the disgraceful ban on LGBT people serving in our armed forces, a Labour Government introduced civil partnerships, adoption rights and gender recognition, and a Labour Government delivered the landmark Equality Act 2010. This Labour Government are building on that proud legacy. We have acted to right the historical wrongs committed against LGBT+ veterans; we have equalised strands of hate crime legislation; we are funding LGBT+ focused domestic abuse services; we have committed to ending new HIV transmissions in England by 2030; and we are investing millions of pounds in promoting and protecting LGBT+ rights globally.

Who could forget that we now have the gayest Parliament in history? It is filled with colleagues who continue to break barriers, many of whom are here today, and I will mention just a few. The tireless work of my hon. Friend the Member for North Warwickshire and Bedworth (Rachel Taylor) to tackle hate crime will leave a lasting legacy. My hon. Friend the Member for Jarrow and Gateshead East (Kate Osborne) has worked with the Council of Europe on banning conversion practices, and her work is an inspiration to me. My hon. Friend the Member for Wallasey (Dame Angela Eagle) was my first boss in this place, and I hope she will forgive me for observing that she was championing LGBT+ equality in this House before some hon. Members were even born. I do not have time to mention many others from across the House, many of whom are in the Chamber, but I am proud to serve alongside them all.

I remember my first London Pride with LGBT Labour like it was yesterday. Walking through our capital alongside thousands of LGBT+ people genuinely made the hairs on the back of my neck stand up. There was something profoundly joyous and moving about marching openly through the streets, when for generations, LGBT+ people had been forced to hide who they were. For so many years, people had lived with fear, shame and isolation, yet there we were, together, visible and unapologetic. Finally, I was not alone. Despite growing up feeling that I should be ashamed of who I was, I had found my voice and my community. It certainly was a party— I will spare the House the stories—but Pride is more than just a celebration; it is a protest. Marching as a proud lesbian was a radical act of protest, and it still is.

Yes, Pride is about celebrating the progress that we have made, but it is also about acknowledging the work that we still need to do—and I fear that we do have much more work to do. Progress, once achieved, is never permanently secured. Even today—especially today—it must be defended, renewed and extended. Too many people still experience discrimination, abuse and exclusion because of who they are or who they love. Trans people, in particular, continue to face levels of hostility that should have no place in modern Britain. Many hon. Members will speak about LGBT+ constituents, particularly their trans constituents, who are anxious about the direction of public debate, and I thank them for their constructive engagement and advocacy.

I want to take the time to acknowledge that the Government have laid the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s updated draft code of practice before Parliament. As hon. Members will know, the updated draft code reflects the Supreme Court’s judgment that, in the Equality Act 2010, “sex” means biological sex, and that there remain protections for trans people against discrimination, harassment or victimisation on the basis of gender reassignment. The judgment does not remove those legal protections for trans people, nor does it remove the legal framework, outside the Equality Act, that allows them to be recognised as being of their acquired gender. We firmly believe that it is possible to lawfully protect single-sex spaces, while also ensuring that trans people can access the services that they need and retain protections against discrimination and harassment. I understand the stress and anxiety that this process has caused for many, and my priority is for us to move forward together, with compassion for all who continue to be impacted. The fundamental principle is that everyone, including trans people, deserves to live their life with dignity, safety and respect.

My hon. Friend is making a very powerful speech. While I understand the intent behind the guidance, many of my constituents are concerned about its practical effect. It is one thing to write guidance for a world in which everyone behaves reasonably and respectfully, but it is another to ensure that vulnerable people are protected in the world as it actually is. Can the Minister provide additional reassurance to the House that the Government and the EHRC will keep the guidance under review, and will act swiftly, should its implementation lead to unintended consequences for trans and gender-nonconforming people?

I thank my hon. Friend for the very important points he makes. I would just like to restate that, as the Supreme Court said, trans people have rights enshrined in law, and we are all duty-bound to uphold and defend those rights.

Unfortunately, the lives of trans people are all too often used as a political football. We have been living in a political climate made infinitely more toxic by the actions of a few. Those unfortunately include some Members of this House, such as representatives of the Reform party who believe that families like mine are not stable. That party appears to be defunding Pride events and tearing down Pride flags across the country. It is also supporting a candidate who reportedly called LGBT+ people fighting for equality “attention seeking”, and said they were

“making a big song and dance about it”.

I am not much of a singer or a dancer, but I am certainly proud to stand with the LGBT+ community, and I refuse to stop working towards equality for every single one of my constituents just because it makes the Reform party uncomfortable.

The Minister is giving an incredibly powerful speech, and I am already welling up—even before my hon. Friend the Member for Luton North (Sarah Owen) has started to speak. I just want to say to the Minister that if we did not have the changes in the law that allowed people like her to be in this place, doing what she is doing, this place would be far worse for it, so I welcome her speech.

I thank my hon. Friend for that lovely intervention, and for all he does for this House and for his constituents.

In Harlow!

Sorry—in Harlow. I missed my chance there.

I want to say very clearly from this Dispatch Box that I recognise the community’s fear and anxiety. When public debate becomes toxic, that has consequences in people’s everyday lives—in schools, in workplaces and online. It has consequences for accessing services, and for whether people feel safe simply being themselves— and those consequences all too often manifest in violence and hate.

The Minister is making a really important point. The fact that the first action of many Reform councils has been to tear down Pride flags and to ban or defund Pride events really speaks to who they are and their values, and I do not think that they are the values of the vast majority of British people.

The Minister is talking about the importance of supporting the LGBTQ+ community in our workplaces. She will know that the Government have today accepted all the recommendations of my noble Friend Lord Mann’s report on antisemitism in the NHS, and I really welcome that. My only question is about political symbols in the NHS. My view is that the Pride flag is not a political symbol, but a symbol of inclusion. Will the Minister work with the Department of Health and Social Care to ensure that when we bring forward the guidance, we do not fall into the trap of labelling Pride flags or Pride symbols as political symbols, but instead continue to allow our NHS to demonstrate that it is an inclusive organisation for the LGBT+ community?

First, I associate myself with my hon. Friend’s remarks about the early acts of Reform councils. I also say to him that the NHS is absolutely for all of us, including the LGBT+ community, and I will make sure that Health Ministers have heard his comments.

Hate crime against the LGBT+ community is still far too prevalent. I spoke with those at the LGBT+ domestic violence charity Galop this week, and they have had a 27% increase in hate crime calls in the past year. They told me that hate is becoming more normalised, and perpetrators are becoming more emboldened to target LGBT+ people, whether we are talking about stranger abuse on the streets or physical violence. I am proud that this Government have strengthened protections for LGBT+ people through the Crime and Policing Act 2026, ensuring that our community is properly protected from targeted abuse and violence. We have equalised the law, so that hate crime committed on the basis of sexuality or gender identity is treated the same as racially or religiously motivated hostility. The principle is straight- forward: nobody should live with the fear that their identity makes them a target. This was a commitment in the manifesto on which I was proud to stand for election, and I am delighted that we have delivered it.

I will also be proud to deliver on another manifesto commitment, which is a full trans-inclusive ban on conversion practices. Let us be clear about what conversion practices are. They are a very specific, insidious form of abuse that attempts to change who somebody is. LGBT people are told that who they are is wrong, that it is shameful, and that it can and should be changed. This is not about banning legitimate therapy, explorative conversations or prayer. All people in this country deserve to have access to open conversations about their identity, and this Government are not seeking to change that. What we are seeking to ban is abuse, plain and simple. These abhorrent practices are coercive, degrading and harmful, and they have caused profound trauma to LGBT+ people for decades. I hope Members across the House agree with me that these practices have no place in modern Britain, and will support our work to ban them once and for all.

I appreciate the point the Minister is making, but the Government have long spoken about a Bill to ban conversion therapy. In fact, they have been talking about bringing forward draft legislation for nearly two years. Can the Minister give us a concrete timeline? Will we see the draft legislation in 2026, or in the next year, or the year after that?

I hope the hon. Member has gathered from my remarks that I am absolutely focusing on this very important ban with speed and determination.

Before I conclude, I want to recognise that while the Government have an important role to play in protecting LGBT+ rights, lasting change is delivered every day by people and organisations working in communities across our country, and I am sure that we will hear lots of examples of that in the debate. I have had the privilege of meeting remarkable organisations, including Stonewall, Galop, the LGBT Foundation, the LGBT Consortium and the Terrence Higgins Trust, among many others. These organisations help people through some of the most difficult moments in their lives, challenge injustice and build stronger communities. We owe them our gratitude and we have a responsibility to support their work.

That is why this Government are taking Pride Month so seriously, being loud and proud about our commitment to the LGBT community. Throughout this month, Departments across Government will be hosting events and activities that celebrate LGBT+ communities and highlighting the issues they face. From the Ministry of Justice engaging with LGBT legal professionals to the work of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs exploring the experiences of LGBT+ people in rural communities, colleagues across Government are playing their part.

Our commitment to Pride is not confined to a single month. We will stand with the LGBT+ community year-round, because that is what this Labour Government stand for: hope and unity over division and hate. It is a simple principle that I hope Members across this House can agree on: every person in this country should be able to live freely, safely and with dignity, regardless of who they are or who they love. That is the principle we reaffirm today and that is the commitment this Government will continue to defend.

I call the shadow Minister.

May I begin by apologising to Members? I have sought permission from Mr Speaker to leave early today, because I have a long-standing event in my constituency that I have to attend. I apologise that I will not be here—[Interruption.] It is not to do with Pride, I am afraid. I am very happy to be leaving the rest of this very important debate in the capable hands of my hon. Friend the Member for East Grinstead and Uckfield (Mims Davies).

What a pleasure it is to follow the Minister for Equalities, the hon. Member for Reading West and Mid Berkshire (Olivia Bailey). She made a really great and very personal speech. I am equally grateful, on behalf of His Majesty’s Opposition, to have the opportunity to open this important debate, because Pride Month is a celebration. It is a celebration of the progress that has been made, of the lives lived openly, of families formed, of communities built and of people who no longer have to hide who they are, but it is also a reminder of why that progress was necessary in the first place and why it can never be taken for granted.

For me, this debate is deeply personal. I have seen changes in my lifetime that I could never have imagined when I was growing up as a young gay man on the isle of Anglesey. Back then, community was not always easy to find. I have joked before many times in this House that it often felt like I was literally the only gay in the village. But behind the humour is a serious point: for many people, particularly in small towns, in families, workplaces or faith communities, being LGBT can still feel a very lonely place indeed. That is one of the reasons why Pride still matters.

I am very proud of my good friend and former Member of this House Eric Ollerenshaw, who was one of the first five people on the very first Pride march back in the early 1970s. He describes how, at the time, even the police were spitting at them—just unbelievable when we think about that today. Pride is not only about big parades, flags and public celebrations. It is about the teenager who feels completely alone; it is about the person who is quietly calculating every single word they say. I have spoken before about being attacked and hospitalised when I was younger just because of who I am. Walking down that road, being followed by three men, being called a queer and knowing what was coming next was terrifying. I am so glad that we now live in a country that has changed enormously since then.

In the spirit of this debate, I would like to say to the right hon. Gentleman that, although we might not agree on everything politically, this place is better because he is here and we should recognise that.

Do you know, I am going to cry in a minute! I thank the hon. Gentleman, although that is the second opportunity he has missed to mention Harlow—I am getting worried about him! [Laughter.]

As I was saying, that experience has stayed with me; it reminds me why progress matters and can never be taken for granted. Prejudice may look different today, but it has not vanished. There are still people around the world, and some people in this country, who cannot come out or live the life they want to live. That is why Pride is not just a month in the calendar; it is a statement that those people are not forgotten. It is also why what happens in this House matters. The law can change lives. It can tell people whether they are recognised, protected and valued. That is why the passage of the equal marriage Act in 2013—the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act—remains one of the proudest moments of my time in Parliament.

No party has a monopoly on progress. People from all parties and none have fought for the rights and dignity of LGBT people. I am proud that Conservatives played a part in delivering equal marriage and I am proud of the progress that Conservative Governments made on HIV prevention, testing and treatment, including HIV Testing Week and the legalisation of HIV self-testing kits.

I also want to pay tribute to the Terrence Higgins Trust and its CEO Richard Angell, and all those who have been campaigning to end new HIV transmissions by 2030. As the shadow Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, I absolutely back the Government in their ambition to see that happen. When I was growing up, I never thought that we would see the end of it. It was so terrifying at the time and the fact that we now have that goal in sight is truly remarkable and wonderful.

I also want to say clearly as the shadow Secretary of State for Health that LGBT health matters. That means keeping a strong focus on HIV prevention, testing and treatment, making sure that stigma continues to be broken down, recognising the particular mental health pressures some LGBT people face, and ensuring that everyone can use the NHS without fear, shame or discrimination. It also means remembering older LGBT people, including those who lived through the AIDS crisis, who should never feel forced back into the closet when they need social care or support later on in life, or if they end up in residential or nursing homes. I know that that has been happening and it is something we need to address. I hope the Minister, when winding up, might be able to update the House—she mentioned some of the continuing work on HIV prevention—on how that progress will be maintained, because the clock is ticking and I am conscious that there is still quite a bit to do, and update us on what work the Government are planning to do on older LGBT people as we think about their care needs in the future.

I, too, want to address the Equality Act code of practice and the Supreme Court ruling, because they have been very prominent in recent days. The law is now clear that for the purposes of the Equality Act, sex means biological sex. Single-sex spaces must be protected where they are needed, particularly where privacy, dignity and safeguarding are at stake. That clarity matters for women, service providers, staff who need to know what the law requires of them, and the NHS. Decisions about female wards, intimate care, changing rooms and women-only services cannot be left to confusion or inconsistent local interpretation.

We should also be able to and capable of saying two things at once. We can say that sex means biological sex and that single-sex spaces must be protected, and we can also say that trans people must be treated with dignity, respect, compassion and love. Those positions are not mutually exclusive. They are both part of a serious, humane and lawful approach. I hope the Minister can set out what the code of practice means in practice for the NHS, including for female wards and the other issues I have mentioned. NHS staff, patients and trusts need clarity on how the law should be applied.

This House should be able to approach these issues without pretending they are simple, and also without pretending that clarity is unkind. That is why I think it is a mistake when Pride events suggest that political parties should have no place in them. The banning of political parties from some Pride events is disappointing, because Pride does not belong to one political tribe. The people elected to this House, and the LGBT organisations in all our parties, have helped to deliver real change. I pay tribute to them all and thank them for what they have done. LGBT people are Conservatives, Labour members, Liberal Democrats, Greens, nationalists, independents, and people of no political party at all. They should not be made to feel unwelcome. In fact, I want to see more gay and lesbian people in politics. Banning political parties from Pride flies in the face of its meaning, in my view.

I want to mention lesbians specifically, because too often their voices are treated as an afterthought in debates about LGBT rights. Lesbian women have been central to the history of Pride, activism and community life. Their experiences matter in debates about healthcare, safety, dignity and sex-based rights. Pride Month should never allow the L in LGBT to become silent.

No one should have to hide who they are in order to feel safe. That means taking anti-LGBT hate crime seriously. Too many incidents still go unreported because people think they are too minor or worry they will not be taken seriously. They should be taken very seriously indeed, and that is true in sport, schools, workplaces, healthcare, families and public life.

Pride is a celebration of how far we have come, but it is also a promise that we will remember those who came before us, stand with those who still feel alone, and help the next generation live more freely, safely and honestly than the last. That is what Pride Month means to me, and that is why this debate matters.

I call the Chair of the Women and Equalities Committee.

It is a real honour to follow the speeches made by the Minister and shadow Minister. The commitment of both to furthering LGBTQ+ rights, in this place and outside it, should be honoured. I agree with my hon. Friend the Member for Harlow (Chris Vince)—I got Harlow in—that they are both an inspiration to everyone in this House now and to future generations. I hope that we see more diversity in this place—because, boy, don’t we benefit from it.

This is another equalities debate that has been pushed to a Thursday, when many MPs have returned to their constituencies and the press are focusing on the Sunday news stories. It is disappointing to know that there are so many people who wanted to be here but cannot be. It is pretty embarrassing that there is not a single Back Bencher from the Conservatives, and that there is only one representative from the Lib Dems, Greens and the SNP, when I know there are more voices that would be willing to be here if Parliament gave the time to equalities debates that it should give. I have written to the Procedure Committee, because these debates should be a priority across all Departments and all the work that we carry out in this place. They are not an add-on at the end. If we are only working for some of society, we are not working for all.

I am usually excited about Pride Month. I usually love a good party, and, unlike the Minister, I like a bit of dancing—I am rubbish at singing, but I will do it. Pride is a chance to celebrate and come together—absolutely—but it is also a chance to understand, grow and learn. Sadly, Pride is more of a protest this year than a party. I always say that progress is not inevitable, but I hoped that it would never regress as quickly as I have seen. It is a disgraceful environment where people’s genitalia are up for debate, UK politicians proudly question the ability of same-sex couples to provide loving and safe homes for children, and a tiny vulnerable part of our society is blatantly demonised under the guise of protecting women and girls.

I have said it before in this House and I will say it again that my safety, both physical and emotional, has only been threatened by men: men who were born men; men with power; men unaccountable for their actions; men who have never faced justice; men who would never be stopped by a sign on a toilet door. Those are the people who threaten our safety and society, and until they are the focus of the debate about women and girls’ safety, no amount of single-sex spaces is going to save any of us. Scapegoating the trans community will not work; it will not make any of us safer.

The inconsistencies in the latest iteration of the EHRC code of practice make it unworkable and unjust. “Challenge someone, but do not cause harm or embarrassment by challenging them”—how is that possible? How does someone prove or disprove that? “Ask trans people to use a third space but somehow keep their right to a private life.” The Women and Equalities Committee will be questioning the EHRC chair next week, so I am minded of the remarks of the Minister for Equalities earlier this week that we must ask the chair about those details.

The Government, as well as the EHRC, have to provide answers to the trans community, businesses, organisations and the general public on how this sorry saga ends without things being further inflamed. All I see is more litigation, pain, uncertainty, time and money being spent solving a problem that most people did not prioritise above the actual problems that this country should be dealing with, such as the 97% of reported rapes that go unpunished.

Cis-male perpetrators do not have to disguise themselves as anyone or anything to get away with the most hideous of crimes in this country, because they are already committing them and, on the whole, getting away with it, unfortunately. The distortion of the arguments about women’s safety has had a devastating impact on trans people, with the focus on trans women, but with trans men completely forgotten from the conversation—not to mention non-binary and intersex people.

Let us look at the real-life impact that this is having on the people we represent. I want to share a conversation that I had yesterday. It was with my constituent and friend, Teraina Hird, an 83-year-old trans woman. We chatted yesterday; I did not know this at the time, but she had discharged herself from hospital so that she could speak with me. Teraina told me that that was how much it meant to her to get her experience and questions across to me and fellow parliamentarians. I did have a go at her—I told her that I would rather she had stayed in hospital and that her health was more important. She disagreed, and said, “I’m 83. I have lived my life. This is about the future generations and the others who come next.” This debate was more important to her than her own health.

Teraina put her health at risk to speak with me—that is how existential it feels right now for the trans community. She has always fought hard against bigotry. She is one of the most talented people with her hands that I have seen. She is a woodturner, and she makes beautiful pens. She does so many fantastic things with pieces of wood—things I could never have imagined people could do without heavy machinery. She was a mechanical engineer and owned her own business in Luton.

When Teraina transitioned, the local media covered it in a matter-of-fact way. But The Sun phoned up and said, “We’d love to cover it. Don’t worry, we’re not going to send a reporter. We’ve got everything that we need from the local news. We’ll just send a photographer.” They took a photo of her, and plastered on the headline, “Mechanic loses nuts…and customers bolt”. That is disgusting, but to be honest, it seems almost mild when compared with the vilification of the LGBTQ+ community in some parts of the media nowadays.

Teraina asks these questions of the Minister and everyone in this place. How can the safety of trans men and trans women be protected when using the toilets of the opposite gender? How is it going to be policed? Are there even enough cubicles and toilets to deal with the proposed change? Teraina discharged herself to share those questions with me, but she was also terrified of being put on a men’s ward. Her last question is: where would she have been put to be treated? Which ward would she have been put on? She would never have felt comfortable on a men’s ward. Would it have been dignified for her to receive treatment on a men’s ward?

These are Teraina’s words:

“I was born a male but I have never been a man. I tried but I failed. I always have felt female. Even at school as a boy, I was bullied for being”—

in her words—

“a ‘sissy’ so I left.”

This has had a lifelong impact on Teraina.

Another Luton constituent is now having to walk considerable distances to use a toilet outside of her place of work, which is causing not just an emotional impact, but a physical one—and potentially a financial impact, too, if she cannot remain in her place of work without being outed against her will. Where is her right to privacy? The Minister spoke about the Supreme Court being very clear that the ruling should not impact a trans person’s right to privacy, but is my constituent’s right to privacy being protected? Currently it is not.

I have always believed that unless we are all enjoying progress, none of us truly is. If we care about human rights, we do not get to pick which human rights we care about and which we do not.

LGBT rights and women’s rights should be able to go hand in hand. The Select Committee heard from the Spanish Ministry of Equality about how Spain is leading the way in LGBT+ rights, ranking No. 1 on ILGA-Europe’s rainbow map. I am not just jealous of Spanish weather; I am jealous of Spanish equality. Spain has set up a helpline to provide support to LGBT people in instances of abuse and is providing world-leading fertility treatment, which is benefiting the LGBT+ communities. It also recently appointed its first global LGBTQ+ rights envoy to advocate for the decriminalisation of same-sex relations internationally. We can look to Spain as a leader not just in Europe, but across the world.

Add to that the fact that Spain is highly progressive in its approach to women’s rights. It is not one or the other; it is both. It has developed an advanced monitoring system that police use to risk assess and track cases of gender-based violence and provide tailored protection to victims. Since the introduction of the VioGén system, the rate of femicide by a partner or ex-partner has decreased year on year in Spain.

These international examples make it abundantly clear that despite what some of the loudest voices inside this place and outside will say, it is not a case of women’s rights versus trans rights or women’s safety versus LGBT freedom. No, we can and should all live alongside each other—not just with dignity, but with joy, proper celebration, proper understanding and proper love. When we take male violence against women seriously, we are protecting all women and girls, and we are acknowledging the real villain behind this crisis rather than scapegoating the trans community.

It is hard sometimes to find reasons to be cheerful, but the world of sport may offer some—it is full of LGBT+ legends after all, just like our Parliament. Women’s football and rugby continue to provide incredible role models for young women—actually, women of any age—who are grappling with their sexuality. Across the Women’s super league, the Lionesses, the Red Roses and English cricket, there are women living their truth in loving relationships with each other—married, raising children and being themselves publicly and proudly. They are absolutely knocking it out of the park.

For the majority of male footballers, displaying their girlfriends and wives online alongside their family seems completely normal—they take it for granted that society accepts and celebrates their personal lives. But for our lesbian and bisexual athletes in same-sex relationships, each time they do an anniversary post or kiss their partner in the stands, they are unwittingly making a statement and risking abuse. I want to thank them for their everyday bravery. I also hope that it will not be a brave act for very much longer, and that it will just be normal.

We need to acknowledge once again that there are still no out male premier league footballers. To be honest, who can blame them? Homophobia, alongside racism and misogyny, continues to be a rampant disease among both match-going fans and trolls online. Hatred does not stay in one lane; it never does. If hon. Members want to see an example of that, look at what Reform councils are doing with Pride flags. They are not stopping with Pride flags; they are going after Ukrainian flags, too. There will always be somebody—when people do not have the answers to the problems facing them, it is easier to blame somebody else than to really look inwards, at themselves, and at how we can further our country together. This week, Millwall FC released a Pride playbook to advise on connecting with LGBT+ teams. I hope that this is the beginning of a new era of inclusivity in men’s football, but I know that we have so much further to go.

There are seeds of hope for LGBT people across our culture and society, and I want to end with some of them. February saw HBO drama “Heated Rivalry” break viewing records across the world—I am sure that a lot of us enjoyed watching it. It celebrates a particularly fiery LGBT love story while also channelling new fans into winter sports. I love ice hockey. I am so up for all full-contact sports, but roll in a good love story too? Happy days.

Durham Pride has raised enough money to throw the biggest Pride in its history, with support from the local trade union movement. If there is an example of love winning, this is it. Especially in the face of hatred, love will always win. It is an example of what we must all fight against in the future.

Last October, King Charles unveiled the first mural dedicated to LGBTQ+ members of the British armed forces. Named “An Opened Letter”, it honours servicemen and women who experienced homophobic abuse.

Rates of adoption among LGBT people have quadrupled over the past decade, with at least 20% of all adopted children now finding a loving home with a same-sex couple. How dare any politician—how dare anybody—say that that is not the best place for a child? The best place for a child is always in a loving home.

And, as we have heard today, our Labour Government are set to finally bring in an end to the painful, arcane practice of conversion therapy with the trans-inclusive draft conversion practices Bill included in the King’s Speech. I cannot wait to support it when it is introduced.

While the light behind the clouds may be hard to find, and the rainbows may be really far in the distance from all the rain, it is important that we do find that glimmer of light and those rainbows this Pride month. I want to end with the words that Teraina said to me yesterday. It is what her grandmother and family had always said. It is also something my grandma always said to me:

“Treat other people the way you would like to be treated.”

It is not that hard.

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

I start by saying that I am honoured to be the spokesperson for this debate and to speak after some incredibly powerful speeches. In particular, I acknowledge the work of the hon. Member for Luton North (Sarah Owen) and her words today. I thank her for all she does on human rights, and particularly for her advocacy for the trans community. I am not sure how I will follow what she has shared. I know that there will be more to come in the Chamber, and that there will probably be more tears.

Pride Month is a celebration of visibility, dignity and progress, but it should also be a moment of honesty. Despite the hard-fought progress we have made as a nation, we are slipping backwards on LGBT rights in this country. In 2025, the UK fell six places to 22nd in ILGA-Europe’s LGBT rights ranking; to put that into context, we were ranked No. 1 in Europe in 2015. When it comes to gender recognition rights, the UK now ranks in the bottom six of 49 European countries. That should concern every Member of this House who believes in the fundamental rights of equality, freedom and human dignity.

Pride Month matters because standing up for the LGBT community is ultimately about standing up for everyone’s right to live openly, safely and authentically. It says that no matter who you are, who you love or how you present, you are equally valued and equally respected. This House should remember that progress in LGBT equality has never been inevitable. Every single right was fought for by campaigners, activists and political allies who refused to accept the discrimination that was the status quo. Our thanks should and do go to every single one of them.

The Liberal Democrats are proud to have stood alongside that movement for decades. We fought to repeal section 28—the legislation that silenced LGBT people in schools and communities, and that told an entire generation that who they were was something shameful. I have two sons, and through them I have seen how different education is now from when I was at school. I am incredibly grateful to be able to see how education has changed. I can see that young people living as their authentic selves has become supported by schools. Most inspiringly, I have watched so many young people come through my door who are living and exploring who they are. I think that we should all take inspiration from so many of the next generation, who are simply letting each other love who they want to love and be who they want to be.

As a party, the Liberal Democrats were instrumental in delivering equal marriage. Our former Equalities Minister, Lynne Featherstone—now Baroness Featherstone in the other place—led the fight inside Government to make marriage equality a reality in this country. I am deeply proud that we led that fight, and I have been deeply moved by the couples who have generously shared with me their stories about what that change meant for them as a couple and for their families.

In spite of all that progress, this year has been a particularly upsetting year for much of the LGBT community, especially trans, non-binary and intersex people, following the Supreme Court ruling on the definition of sex in the Equality Act. Like many Members across this House, I have received deeply distressing accounts from constituents who are fearful that they will not be able to participate fully in public life going forward.

Let me be clear: trans rights and human rights are not in conflict. After the Supreme Court ruling, the Government’s responsibility was to provide clear and workable guidance, but the EHRC’s code of practice, laid before Parliament just two weeks ago, is, in its current form, exclusionary, unworkable and deeply concerning. Even the Government’s own equality impact assessment acknowledges disproportionate harm to those with protected characteristics. It warns that women who do not conform to cultural expectations of what a woman should look like could face challenges simply in accessing a women-only space. It acknowledges the negative impact on disabled people, with Disability Rights UK warning against forcing trans and non-binary people into separate, third spaces. Most alarmingly, it explicitly states that some trans people could effectively be barred from both spaces aligned with their gender identity and spaces aligned with their birth sex, leaving them with no space in services at all. That is not dignity; it is exclusion.

I am personally worried for the whole trans community, particularly the next generation of trans men and women. With all the changes in the way that the LGBT community are being spoken about here in the UK, and with the stories that have been shared by Members already about certain political parties and individuals, what is that saying to the next generation? What world are we leaving as a legacy? We have to act now before it is too late. That is why my right hon. Friend Ed Davey and our women and equalities spokesperson—

Order. The hon. Lady has been here nearly two years. We must stop referring to Members by their names—it has been rife today. Members must be referred to by their constituencies, please.

I do apologise, Madam Deputy Speaker.

That is why my right hon. Friend the Member for Kingston and Surbiton (Ed Davey) and my hon. Friend the Member for Chelmsford (Marie Goldman) have called upon the Government to withdraw the code and ensure that this issue is properly scrutinised by Parliament.

Guidance of this significance should not simply be pushed through as a statutory instrument subject to the negative procedure, without proper democratic debate or a vote in this House. Alongside parliamentary scrutiny of the code, there are urgent actions that the Government could take now. One meaningful and long-overdue step would be finally to implement a fully trans-inclusive ban on conversion practices. That was proposed back in 2018 by Theresa May’s Government, but it still has not happened. I have attended many Pride events and talked to people about a ban, and they are not aware that a ban is not already in place, and they are frankly shocked.

The Government promised in the last King’s Speech to publish a draft Bill, but they did not. They promised again to do so in this King’s Speech, and although I thank the Minister for her comments on this issue, I join the hon. Member for Aberdeen North (Kirsty Blackman) in pressing the Minister for clarity on a timeline. The LGBT community cannot wait until the end of this Session, only to see the same promise broken yet again. Conversion practices are barbaric. They are based on the offensive idea that LGBT people are somehow broken and in need of fixing. The practices cause profound psychological harm and have absolutely no place in a modern society.

This Pride month, let us celebrate the progress that generations before us fought so hard to achieve. Let us also recognise that equality is never guaranteed and that we are in an incredibly fragile place. At a time when LGBT people, particularly trans people, are increasingly being used as a political football in divisive culture wars, this House has a responsibility to stand firmly on the side of dignity, compassion and human rights. Pride must always be more than a celebration; it must be a year-round promise that we will keep fighting until everyone is truly free to live openly and equally without fear.

It is a privilege to follow such excellent contributions to this debate, particularly those from the hon. Member for Guildford (Zöe Franklin) and my hon. Friend the Member for Luton North (Sarah Owen), who I thought gave an absolutely cracking speech.

This afternoon I want to talk about the LGBTQ+ community—my community—in Macclesfield and across the country, and about the very real challenges that our community now faces, but I want to begin with something personal. I am proud to be the Member of Parliament for Macclesfield, and I am equally proud to be the first openly gay Member of Parliament that my constituency has ever sent to this House. I say that not to draw attention to myself, but because I know what it means. It means something to the young person in Macclesfield who wonders whether someone like them can ever hold a position like this. It means something to the person who grew up in our area, as I did, and was never sure that they belonged. Representation matters, visibility matters, and I and others are humbled to carry that responsibility, including the Minister, who started this debate so ably. When I speak about Pride, I am speaking not as an observer but as someone who knows what it is to need it.

Macclesfield has given me every reason to be proud, because the town and rural communities I represent today are warmer, more open and more welcoming than the ones I knew growing up. That transformation has happened not by chance but because of the courage of LGBT+ people who stayed visible and refused to disappear and because of local communities that chose to embrace them.

Nowhere is that spirit more alive than in MaccPride, our town’s own Pride festival, which has grown from an idea in 2018 into a joyous, colourful celebration in the heart of our town centre. I want to take a moment to thank the extraordinary people who make it happen: Sophie Armitt and Olivia Clare, Andrew Angus-Whiteoak, Kyle Frost, Kerry McKeith, Jo Stratford, Paula Parkes—the incredibly important parade co-ordinator—Rachel Wisson, Serena Lavin, Jenni Duggan, the amazing Stella Wake-Bennett, whose wife Sarah Bennett-Wake was the first openly gay mayor of Macclesfield and is a friend, Charlie Higgins Bos, Pippa Dean, Mikki Tiamo, and Jynx Noctem. They are the reason that Macclesfield Pride happens. They give their time, energy, creativity and passion year after year—entirely voluntarily—to create something genuinely wonderful for our community. Parliament should know what they do, and I am proud to say their names in the Chamber today. I know that other colleagues will similarly have activists in their area who they are equally proud of.

That spirit is also on display at our regular Stride for Pride, which is organised by the wonderful Mika and Dan of the Yas Bean coffee shop. It is a community event that brings people together in solidarity as much as celebration. Solidarity is not incidental to the LGBT+ story; it is central to it. Our community has always known that we show up for each other—across differences, across generations—because sometimes there is nobody else. The need for that solidarity has never been more urgent than it is right now.

Before I turn to some of my concerns, let me say a little of the good. I am proud to have supported my hon. Friend the Member for North Warwickshire and Bedworth (Rachel Taylor) in her campaign to make LGBT+ hate crimes aggravated offences that carry tougher sentences; I am proud that the Government are delivering financial compensation to LGBT+ veterans who have suffered abuse, prejudice and dismissal under the awful historical armed forces ban; and I am proud that the Government will bring in a ban on conversion practices. I eagerly look forward to voting for it. It hangs on a timeline and a history of fantastic progress by the Labour party. That is not exclusive to the Labour party, but fantastic progress has been made under Labour Governments, including the repeal of section 28, the introduction of civil partnerships and the adoption rights that we heard of earlier.

I will talk about things causing real concern, which colleagues have already raised ably this afternoon: the concerns that trans people have. Trans constituents have written to me with real worry since the draft code of practice was laid before this House in May. It is my duty to represent their concerns honestly and clearly, because they deserve that, and I know that the Government will want to hear them.

First, let me start with where we stand internationally. The hon. Member for Guildford pointed out that we have dropped significantly in the ILGA-Europe rainbow map. To think that in 2015 we were first—what an incredible thing to have been proud of—and then we fell 22 places in the space of a decade. The hon. Member also pointed out that on the issue of trans rights and legal gender recognition, we are now ranked 45th out of 49 European nations.

We have not gone backwards by accident. I have said before in this place that political will matters, as do legal frameworks and words laid before this House. Transphobic hate crimes have increased since 2016, according to Home Office data. Some of that is because of better reporting, but some is undoubtedly due to the toxic atmosphere being directed towards such a small minority. It is real fear, real isolation and real violence felt by people who are simply trying to live as themselves.

I want to be clear about where I stand: I support women’s rights to single-sex spaces and services, as set out in the Equality Act. Those rights are real, they matter and I defend them. However, I disagree with attempts to make them mutually exclusive with the dignity and safety of trans people; both can and must be protected. I give credit to the Secretary of State, with regards to the guidance, for the engagement that she has had with MPs on all sides of the House. I know that she faced an incredible amount of pressure from all sorts of directions. However, I have heard from constituents, trans constituents and parents with trans children who are genuinely frightened that, without clearer protections, they will face more exclusion and harassment, and we will all see more expensive and exhaustive legal battles.

As has already been referenced, the Government’s equality impact assessment warns of a

“disproportionate risk of violence and sexual assault”

towards trans women if they are directed to use male services. That is not a campaigning document; it is the Government’s own analysis, and it deserves an answer.

I am also worried, as the hon. Member for Luton North has pointed out, about the practical confusion on the ground for businesses in my constituency, including cafés, restaurants and leisure centres. The guidance states simultaneously that members of the public should not challenge one another on the basis of sex, while also suggesting that where someone is asked to confirm their sex, it should be done “sensitively”. Most reasonable business owners will be bewildered.

As I understand it—I am not an expert—the suggestion from the briefing that some of us attended with the EHRC yesterday is that it would not be possible for a club or an association to decide to be open only to women, including trans women, and they would be challenged on that. Using the prevention of “discomfort or distress” of other service users as a legitimate aim of exclusion, combined with guidance suggesting that concern about a person’s sex may be evidenced by their “appearance” or “behaviour”, creates a subjective, appearance-based threshold that, frankly, is an open invitation to harass anyone, trans or cis, who does not conform to stereotypes. That is not clarity and I worry that it could lead to real harm.

Colleagues have tabled an early-day motion calling for the guidance to be disapproved. I have genuine sympathy with their intention. Many are formidable campaigners for LGBT rights, and I respect them greatly. I have to be honest, however; the Supreme Court judgment is clear, and statutory guidance has to reflect the law as it stands. My view and my assessment is that the genuine route forward for those of us who want clearer and stronger protections for trans people—I count myself firmly in that group—is either new or amended legislation from Parliament, or a future legal challenge that resets the framework. Indeed, we have to accept that the Supreme Court judgment is making the Gender Recognition Act 2004 and the certificates increasingly close to symbolic, with little practical force. That cannot have been Parliament’s intention when it passed that legislation.

Let me finish on a point to which the debate on Pride should always return. I was attending the wedding of some very close gay friends in Argentina some years ago, and I came across the words of Carlos Jáuregui, a great Argentine LGBT activist:

“En una sociedad que nos educa para la vergüenza, el orgullo es una respuesta política”.

In other words, in a society that educates us to be ashamed, pride is a political response. Pride began as a protest, an act of resistance by people who have been told by law and by society that they did not deserve dignity. That history lives in every parade, including the one that will set off through Macclesfield in a few weeks’ time and wind its way down to the marketplace. It lives in Stride for Pride, in every rainbow flag on every shop on Chestergate in Macclesfield; it lives in the fact that I as Macclesfield’s MP am standing here today openly and proudly as myself—the first openly gay Macclesfield MP—because we all stand on the shoulders of activists like those who organised the protests and made this world possible.

In a society that still, in too many ways, educates people to be ashamed, pride is the political response, and it has never been clearer that the need for it is great. I am proud to represent Macclesfield, proud of our extraordinary LGBT community, and proud to say to every LGBT person watching or listening: we see you, we are with you, and we will keep fighting.

I am glad to have the chance to speak in the debate, although I echo the words of the hon. Member for Luton North (Sarah Owen): these things are always on a Thursday. As the sole woman in the SNP, and as the party’s women and equalities spokesperson, I find myself here on Thursdays way more often than my colleagues. It would be nice if we moved these debates around a little, and had them on a Monday occasionally.

I cannot help but agree with every word that the hon. Member for Luton North said. I will try really hard not to be party political, and not to—this is the bit that I will find most difficult—look backwards. Instead, I will try to look forward. I will look for what we need to do. I will point out where things are today and how we can improve them, rather than looking at what was done in the past, but first, I recognise that although Pride is about celebration, it is also about being angry. We should be angry about the injustices. We can celebrate, party, dance, sing and use rainbow colours if we wish to, but we must remember that we are always fighting against those injustices, and trying to improve the world and our small part of it, so that everyone can live their truth and be who they are, including publicly.

There are a number of things that I would like to see happen, changes that need to be made and things that I would like the Government to consider. I asked the Minister a question about the conversion therapy ban. I appreciate, and I believe in, her commitment to that— I have no reason to doubt it. It just rankles a little that when we were talking about the Equality Act judgment, Ministers would say, at the Dispatch Box, “We do support trans people, because we are delivering a fully trans-inclusive conversion therapy ban.” They have been saying that for two years. The trans community feels so hurt and alone as it is, so that rings hollow. Anything that the Minister can do to make sure that the ban happens soon, so that we can at least protect the trans community in one way, would be hugely appreciated.

I turn to the EHRC guidance, how it will work and the impact it will have on people’s lives. An MP should be allowed to choose to tell people, from the Dispatch Box or elsewhere in this Chamber, that they are lesbian, gay, bisexual, or queer. They should be allowed not to choose to do that. The atmosphere and ethos should allow people to choose whether to do that or not. It should be their right to say that out loud or not. In the guidance, we are saying that trans people no longer have that right. We are saying that no trans person who is accessing a service will be allowed to remain quiet about their gender reassignment status; they will have to state what their biological sex is, according to the Equality Act. If they are booked into the NHS—taken into hospital, or into a mental health setting and sectioned—they will have to say to the doctor and the medical staff, “I was assigned female at birth.” They will have to make that clear; their right to privacy is gone. If someone who went to hospital had to say, “I’m bisexual” or “I’m gay” before they were assigned to a ward, that would be completely unacceptable, but we think it is okay for trans people to have to say that, even if it is not medically relevant. We think it is okay for trans people to have to say that before they can go to a swimming pool and into the changing rooms. We are telling people that they must explain what their biological sex is before they can access services.

This is not proportionate guidance. It is not fair to take away that private-life right, which every one of us should have. We should be able to choose what we tell people about our gender identity, biological sex and sexuality. What we say about those should be up to us. For example, if somebody is living in a religious community that has only ever known them as a woman, they will now have to say, “I’m sorry—I can’t use those toilets. I’m not allowed to use them,” or else—I don’t know; I do not know what sanctions result from that. But the guidance does not work.

I appreciate the issue of clarity in the law, which people have talked about. The prayer against the statutory instrument is praying against the guidance. However unhappy some of us are with the judgment, the early-day motion states that the guidance does not work, and that the statutory instrument should not be approved; it is not about overturning the Supreme Court judgment, no matter how many people would like to do that, or about changing the Equality Act. It is specifically about the guidance being inappropriate. I have put my name to the motion because I do not think that the guidance works, or understand how it will work. Trans people living across these islands should have the right to privacy and should not have to disclose their status to anybody who asks.

I will talk about a few things that are probably less serious, but still important. Fertility issues in relation to gay and lesbian couples have been raised with me on many occasions. Will the Minister and the team look into the number of rounds of in vitro fertilisation treatment that are provided to people, and whether that involves discrimination on the basis of sexuality? Can any improvements be made to those systems to ensure that, no matter the sexuality of a couple or an individual, there is a level playing field and people are provided equal access to services? As was said, what children need is a loving family; it should not matter what gender the parents are when they are going for fertility treatment. Anything the Minister can do on that would be helpful.

Let me turn to the social media ban. The shadow Minister, the hon. Member for East Grinstead and Uckfield (Mims Davies), spoke about the loneliness that there can be in being the only gay in the village, somebody whose voice is not heard, or somebody who cannot live their truth in their family. We need to be careful, in any decisions taken around social media bans, not to remove young people from communities they may have found, which might be the only places where they can live their truth, where they are supported and where they can see that there are other people like them. We need to ensure that there are impact assessments, so that we are not committing these young people, who already feel on the outside of things and that they are not accepted, to further isolation. I am not saying that definitely will happen; I am saying that the Government need to assess and consider these things when they take any decisions around social media bans.

Let me also touch on neurodiversity, intersectionality and issues faced by people who fit into numerous categories of minority. It bothers me hugely that this is a prevalent thought for too many people: “You’re not really trans; you’re just autistic.” It is perfectly possible to be autistic and trans. It is perfectly possible to be one and not the other, or both. Too many people are told, or have suggested to them, “You’re just neurodiverse; don’t worry—you’re not really trans.” That is not listening to people and understanding their truth; it is not accepting them for who they are. People grow and change. The Liberal Democrat spokesperson, the hon. Member for Guildford (Zöe Franklin), talked about young people being able to be themselves and accepted as themselves. Some of those young people will change as they go along their path and find the right fit for them. Some of them will be non-binary for a bit, and then realise that they are actually not non-binary at all. That is okay, and it should be okay. We all try things on. I dressed as a goth for a while as a kid; I do not recommend it—I am not nearly pale enough to dress as a goth, but I thought it was a good idea for a wee while. Until I found out who I was, what fitted and how I wanted to express myself, it was okay to try all sorts of things. We should accept young people as they do that, and support them on that journey, as they discover who they are.

I want to raise a concern about school guidance. If a young person at school discloses to their teacher that they are a lesbian or bisexual, there is no automatic feeling that “We had better go and tell their parents, because this is really dangerous and scary.” Some of the guidance for schools states that, if a young person discloses that they are trans, their parents must be told. Now, it is not always safe for their parents to be told. It is concerning if teachers feel that they have to treat trans children differently and have a conversation with parents about that. Children need to feel that they can live their truth and speak to trusted adults about that, without fear that it will be passed on. I do not understand how we can justify treating this issue differently, and how we can say this is somehow dangerous and scary. The more that we treat it differently, and suggest that it is dangerous and scary, the more hatred and lack of understanding there will be for an already marginalised minority group.

I want the Government, and all Governments, to think carefully when they are making decisions or putting out guidance about whether it stigmatises and minoritises an already attacked community—a community that is already finding things difficult. I appreciate the Government talking about DEFRA, for example, looking at the impact of growing up gay in rural communities—I cannot exactly remember the phrase. I appreciate that these things are being done much more throughout Government than they perhaps were. Women and Equalities Ministers are not the only people who ever think about the fact that gay people exist. I am glad that other Departments are doing that, but we need to do more of it, particularly when it comes to trans people and destigmatising and not minoritising individuals.

My last point on trans people relates to puberty blockers. There still needs to be more thought about the best way forward. We are minoritising and stigmatising a community and saying to people that their reality and truth are not the reality and truth, that they are not allowed to believe that and that they are not allowed to be trans until they are 18. People are allowed to be gay before they are 18, but they are allowed to be trans only once they are 18. That is not what somebody has said from the Dispatch Box, but that is what it feels like to so many members of the community, and I would love the Government to consider that.

Let me finish on a happier note. There is a charity in Aberdeen called Four Pillars. I remember more than 10 years ago sitting with Deejay, one of the team who runs the charity, and Deejay saying, “I have this dream of having a café, a drop-in place where people can go and be themselves and feel comfortable.” That café has now been open for a number of years. At the time, both of us laughed because we thought, “That’s never going to happen. We are never going to have that in the city centre of Aberdeen,” but we now have that safe space where people can be themselves. The café does all sorts of cool, fun things, such as dungeons and dragons nights and craft nights. It is a place where people can be themselves and are accepted no matter what that looks like. We need more of that acceptance. We need to ensure that gender non-conformity, for example, is more accepted, that we are not giving people a licence to challenge women with short hair. Why should men not wear skirts? Why should boys not wear pink? That is stuff we have been fighting against for so long, and the guidance we have now risks dragging us backwards.

This is my very last point—I promise, Madam Deputy Speaker. We have heard about how lesbians are sometimes left out of this conversation and we have heard an awful lot about trans people, because of the risks and worries for the trans community, but there is a B in LGBT, too. It does not matter who someone is married to, it does not define their sexuality. If a woman is married to a man, that does not mean she is heterosexual. We can listen to people and accept that their truth may not be as stereotypical as it looks from the outside, and we should remember when we are talking about Pride and LGBT history that there is a B in LGBT, too.

This time last year, in the debate on Pride Month in this House, I told the story of one of my constituents who had served in the military and had been dismissed because of his sexuality. He was treated at that time with a casual brutality. One positive thing about the debate was that a large number of Members wanted to speak, and with a desire to accommodate everyone—understandably—a time limit on contributions was introduced, so unfortunately I had to hurriedly reduce my seven or eight-minute speech to three minutes to fit the time limit. The next morning, having thought about this, I resolved to contact the constituent to apologise, because I felt that in the limited time available I had not done justice to his story. However, when I opened my emails to find his contact details, I saw there was an email from him. I opened it and the email was thanking me for telling his story. That indicates why Pride is so important: it is about stories being told, voices heard, lives recognised. It is about our community of communities being seen and heard. It is about being recognised and celebrated for who we are, not just kindly tolerated.

Every year during Pride Month, we seem to get into the debate about whether Pride is a celebration or a protest. My contribution to those discussions has usually been along similar lines to those used by the Minister in her opening contribution: it is both a celebration and a protest. But now I think it is perhaps something else: Pride is indeed a place. Pride is a place where people can be their authentic selves without judgment or fear. Pride, above all else, should be a place free from shame—that shame we are so often taught from an early age, the shame felt at being who we are, that feeling that we are not quite who we should be. At best, it is the casual assumption by others that we are something we are not. At worst, it is name calling, mockery, rejection and hate. That shame is reinforced by social norms and assumptions.

Pride is that place where people do not have to justify who they are. Yes, Pride can be a public place, a place of declaration, but Pride can be a private place, too—a private place where people find calm in knowing who they are, shedding shame and being themselves. No one should be expected to have to declare repeatedly who they are on request. No one should be challenged on a regular basis to justify who they are. We need to find ways as a society to offer protection to all, but that do not infringe on the privacy of all. We need to find ways of ensuring that all feel safe and are treated with dignity. That may not be straightforward, but it should not be impossible.

I welcome what this Government have done to equalise the law so that hate crimes towards LGBT+ people attract the same severity of sentence as other forms of hate crime, and I commend the work of my hon. Friend the Member for North Warwickshire and Bedworth (Rachel Taylor) in advocating so effectively with others for that change. I welcome the Government’s commitment to a fully inclusive ban on conversion practices. No one should be allowed to be systematically abused because of their gender identity or their sexuality. I hope that across this House we can support legislation to bring that into force.

There are times when I have celebrated progress, times when I have been frustrated by the pace of progress and times when I have been worried by barriers to progress. The truth now is that I have all those feelings in this debate. I can see progress to be celebrated; I can feel some frustration that some things are taking longer than I had hoped for; and I can see opportunities for progress that I feel are being missed. That is why this Pride Month it is all the more important for me to be in that place we call Pride and to share that place with others.

I recognise that Pride does not mean that there will not be those who will mock and name call, threaten and abuse. There will be those who seek to roll back progress and to restrict rights. There will be those who seek to divide us. Our place of Pride is not some fabulous rainbow-glittered ghetto; our Pride is everywhere: on every train and every bus, in every pub and every café, in every factory and every office, in every supermarket and every petrol station, in every food bank and every restaurant, in every sports grounds and every cinema. This month we mark Pride Month, but every month, every week and every day when we live without shame, it is Pride—in place of fear, peace; in place of hate, love; in place of shame; Pride.

Brighton is well known as the LGBT+ capital of the UK. It is a city with a famous reputation as a place where people can be who they are, love who they want to and feel safe. This is a great source of pride for me as a representative and for my constituents who make it such a fantastic place to live or visit.

In previous debates, I have spoken with joy about our amazing community, our huge Pride and trans Pride celebrations, and the LGBTQ+ history of our diverse city by the sea, but with deep regret—I know that my constituents will want me to focus on this—we mark this year’s Pride Month at a time when many if not all our LGBT+ constituents feel unsafe. Our trans and non-binary constituents feel the sharpest edge of the current wave of demonisation and division, but I am sure that, like me, many hon. Members will have heard how it is also impacting our gay, lesbian, bisexual and gender non-conforming constituents. This dangerous and harmful environment has been created online, in our media and, sadly, in this place.

The new guidance produced by the Equality and Human Rights Commission is the most immediate example of how this is happening in legislation. The code of practice for services, public functions and associations is the culmination of years of well funded campaigns to drive a minority group out of British public life. It sets out nothing less than a system of segregation where trans people are excluded from services and spaces that reflect their gender—and in some cases also excluded from services and spaces that reflect their sex assigned at birth. Where unisex facilities exist, they are usually also disabled access, sometimes with restricted key entry, so trans people can be forced into asking for and using those toilets, outing themselves in the process. Where those facilities do not exist, trans people will be left with nowhere to go.

As hon. Members have pointed out, the Government’s own equality impact assessment on the code admits that there will be a significant impact on those with the protected characteristic of gender reassignment as a result of trans people being forced to out themselves by using disabled toilets, and will put trans women at greater risk of sexual violence by making them use men’s services.

I have met service providers in Brighton who want to be inclusive but fear putting themselves at very real legal risk now that the guidance is coming forward. What an impossible position to be put in as a Brighton business—to feel forced to implement oppressive and unworkable policies at the expense of trans and non- binary service users or customers who have never been a cause for concern. How is all that in the spirit of Pride Month?

The bare facts are that research by TransLucent has found that there was just one complaint to English unitary authorities in 2025 concerning trans women’s use of single sex spaces, such as toilets and changing rooms. I firmly believe that it is Parliament’s responsibility to fix that and honour the joy, inclusion and freedom that Pride is really about.

The code of practice is both cruel and confusing. I have written today to the Prime Minister and the Minister for Women and Equalities to make those points. I also urge colleagues to sign early-day motion 240, proposed by the hon. Member for Nottingham East (Nadia Whittome) and which I sponsor, which is a cross-party call on Parliament to disapprove the code of practice as it stands. I hope that we will see much more cross-party work on this issue, as there often was when progress was made by previous Governments.

From my local point of view, it is clear that my city and my constituency want and need a renewed focus on rights and for the guidance to be challenged. I was so pleased and proud to read the recent official statement from the leader of Brighton and Hove city council. She is not from my party, but we are united on this issue for those we represent. She said that the EHRC guidance

“creates a deeply confusing picture which sees trans people being told in the same breath that they may not be able to use facilities aligned with either their sex at birth or their gender. This creates…uncertainty and insecurity for affected individuals and it is deeply unfair.

Trans and non-binary residents of our city have told us that the chilling effect is already being felt with some trans people avoiding accessing services including hospitals and healthcare, to avoid challenge and discrimination…parliament must urgently act and legislate to clarify that trans people have the right to participate in everyday life in an inclusive way.”

The leader of the council and I agree that Parliament should reject this document. We also agree that we must instead legislate to create a legal framework with clear and equal rights for all, which protects trans people’s rightful place in society.

We must also legislate to clear up the obvious misunderstandings of the current law and its intentions at Supreme Court level when the Equality Act and the Gender Recognition Act are looked at together. As the hon. Member for Luton North (Sarah Owen) pointed out so powerfully, other countries have written laws that work for everyone’s rights; so can we.

Trans people of all ages and backgrounds exist in communities across the country and always have done. They have every right to thrive, just as their cisgender friends, family members and colleagues do. I recognise the Minister’s pride in previous achievements and her upcoming plans, but when Labour brought in the Gender Recognition Act over two decades ago, it promised trans people that it would help them live their daily lives in peace, privacy and dignity. This current Government will break that promise if we do not act together to make laws that work. This Pride Month, if the current environment for LGBTQ+ people teaches us one thing, it is that progress is precious and that rights for any of us, if not defended fully, can be rolled back. It is our job in this place to prevent that.

I am grateful to follow the hon. Member for Brighton Pavilion (Siân Berry). I welcome the speeches made by the Minister and the shadow Minister, which were warm and deeply personal, and I recognise the really powerful speech made by the Chair of the Women and Equalities Committee, my hon. Friend the Member for Luton North (Sarah Owen).

It is a privilege to speak in the debate to mark and celebrate Pride Month. It is the first time I have had an opportunity to do so since I was elected. It is a particular privilege to do so not just as Basingstoke’s first ever Labour MP but as its first openly bisexual and LGBT+ MP. I am grateful to the hon. Member for Aberdeen North (Kirsty Blackman) for focusing on the B in LGBT.

As other hon. Members have said, in contributing to this debate, it feels like I am a world away from the scared and sometimes ashamed little boy that I was growing up. That shows the huge progress we have made as a society. As such, I look forward to taking part once again in the Basingstoke Pride parade in August. It is always wonderful to see everyone taking part in that parade, joyful, proud and defiant, and to have people from across the community in Basingstoke lining the streets in celebration and solidarity. I pay tribute to all the organisers and volunteers who make it possible.

As the Minister set out, it is important to recognise just how far we have come, and to celebrate this and previous Labour Governments’ records in advancing LGBT+ rights. The last Labour Government did more for LGBT+ equality than any Government in history. We removed the shameful section 28, passed the legislation that allowed trans people legally to change their gender, introduced the Equality Act and civil partnerships, made progress on adoption, and much more. It is a legacy that made our country a far more open and tolerant place to live, but as many hon. Members have said, we all know that the battle is not won—in some respects, it is never won. That is especially the case as hateful and divisive rhetoric creeps back into our public discourse. Far too many follow that up with real-world actions of hatred.

Hate crime and abusive conversion practices are still happening, and much of the rhetoric directed at LGBT+ people today, in particular at trans people, echoes the hatred that was commonplace in the era of section 28. There has been a shocking rise in homophobic and transphobic hate crime in the past few years. That is why, as many speakers have mentioned, I was proud to stand with colleagues to support the amendment to the Crime and Policing Bill tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for North Warwickshire and Bedworth (Rachel Taylor) to make such hate crimes aggravated offences, ensuring that they are treated with the seriousness they have always deserved. It is also why this Labour Government must remain committed not just to defending the progress made by previous Governments, Labour or otherwise, but to building on our proud legacy in LGBT+ equality.

The Government are making progress by equalising the law so that LGBT+ hate crimes attract sentencing of the same severity as those motivated by race or religion; providing nearly half a million pounds of specialist funding for domestic abuse services; establishing a £21 million fund to support LGBT+ rights globally; improving the experience of our community’s armed forces personnel and veterans and delivering financial recognition to LGBT veterans; working to tackle HIV transmissions and improve access to healthcare; and delivering—hopefully as soon as possible—a full, trans-inclusive ban on conversion practices. Nevertheless, I know from emails and conversations I have had locally that many LGBT+ people in Basingstoke remain incredibly worried about what the future holds for our community in this country.

Many trans people, their friends and families, and people in the wider community are profoundly concerned about the recent draft guidance on the Equality Act, its implementation and its practical effects, which my hon. Friend the Member for Luton North ably set out. I assure my constituents that, with colleagues in this House, I shall present their concerns to the Government and seek reassurance, and that as their MP I will continue to stand with them, not just in Pride Month but every day of the year. We will stand strong against those who would turn back the clock. Yes, we will celebrate progress made by this Government, but we will also push them to go further, because as the Minister said, progress and equality are not permanent; both must be safeguarded, nurtured and renewed. I want all our successors here in Parliament to stand in future Pride Month debates to celebrate the progress made under this and future Governments for the LGBT+ community.

My hon. Friend is making a powerful speech about not only the progress that has been made, but the need for us all to defend our rights because they are never guaranteed as other rights often are. He briefly mentioned this, but I wanted to talk about other nations pulling back from supporting LGBT rights and some, sadly including Ghana, bringing in severe anti-LGBT legislation. I join my hon. Friend in welcoming the £21 million dedicated by the Government to defending and promoting LGBT rights across the world. This is incredibly important in a range of areas, including health and community. Will he join me in commending the Kaleidoscope Trust and the Elton John AIDS Foundation for the work they do in partnership with this country and European countries to ensure we play our part in defending our rights here and in promoting and defending LGBT rights around the world?

I thank my hon. Friend for that intervention. I pay tribute not only to those organisations but to him for the work I know he did with many colleagues to secure that money. Ghana and other countries rolling back on LGBT rights is a demonstration that the battle is never won. The action we take is about not just protecting our community here in this country, but sending a signal about advances that need to be made abroad.

Nobody should be made to feel scared, ashamed or excluded because of who they are or who they love. It is the duty of everyone in this House and outside it to ensure that that is the case, standing with pride as part of or with the LGBT+ community and, as my hon. Friend the Member for Luton North said, ensuring that love always wins.

May I start by saying what an honour it is to speak in this debate and in other similar diversity, equality and inclusion debates? I love the fact that across this House, so many Members come together to support the right cause. It is quite obvious that there is one party whose Members are never here for these debates, and it is the party that says it wants to be in government: the Reform UK party. They cannot be bothered to turn up to express their opinions on these vital debates, and I think that that is absolutely shocking.

It is a little bitter-sweet that I am here today, and I will explain what I mean if you will allow me, Madam Deputy Speaker. I was not meant to be here today. Alongside a number of my colleagues, I was meant to be at the Royal Navy airbase in Yeovilton, but as we all know, a Merlin helicopter crashed yesterday and, sadly, three members of the Royal Navy were killed. For those of us, including my hon. Friend the Member for Macclesfield (Tim Roca), who have met these amazing people in recent months and seen their dedication, skill, commitment and teamwork and the camaraderie between them, this is devastating, and we know that they will be feeling absolutely awful and broken. On behalf of the Members of this House and the other place who should have been there today, I send our thoughts to the family, friends and colleagues of those who lost their lives in the line of duty for this country.

Let me turn to the debate today and the very important time that we stand in for the LGBTQ+ community. “What comes after Pride?” Those were the words on a flyer that was posted through my door when I was a councillor in Basildon, with the rainbow flag on the front of it. I thought, “That’s interesting—what’s this?” On the back, it told me that I should repent. I should not be who I was; I should repent. I should convert myself back to being somebody I was not. These flyers did not just come to my house; they went out right across Basildon, where I was a councillor. I got angry, as I am sure many in this House would on receiving such a direct attack on them and their community, especially after the years of discrimination that many of us who are maybe slightly older have gone through in our lives—

No!

Well, I was born in the ’70s!

But I stopped getting angry. I thought, “Let’s turn this into something positive.” I brought together a group of people, and we formed Basildon Mini Pride. In two weeks, we arranged a march through the centre of Basildon town centre to the one local LGBTQ+ nightspot, where we had an afternoon of celebration, and we saw the support there was for us in that community. There is a lot more support than there is hatred. Off the back of that, Basildon Pride was born. I helped to build that into what I am proud to say is a brilliant organisation that operates throughout the year, supporting the LGBTQ+ community in Basildon today. While I might have moved on to Southend, I have remained chair of trustees of Basildon Pride, because it is my baby, and I want to make sure that it continues to thrive and that our amazing volunteers continue to be supported.

Why? Because, as we have heard today, Pride is more important than ever. We have all heard about ILGA-Europe’s rainbow map, showing us consistently sliding from the top place in 2015 down to 22nd place this year. I do not know how others across this place feel, but for me, that is devastating. I have worked hard on the rights of LGBTQ+ people, but I have only made a small contribution. There are many people across this country who, over many years, fought the discrimination we have faced as a community to get us to the great place where we could have civil partnerships, get married and adopt—rights that we did not have—and where hate against us was actually seen as a hate crime. We earned those rights. I stand on the shoulders of giants who fought for those rights before I came along, so it hurts me to see where we are today.

What also hurts me is the rhetoric that we hear across this country today—rhetoric that is driving wedges into our communities, and trying to drive wedges into the LGBTQ+ community. That is not acceptable. Much of that rhetoric comes from Reform UK. I am going to call that party out today, because some of its behaviour in our community is simply unacceptable.

Many buildings will fly the progress pride flag for Pride Month. Last year, Reform UK started threatening law suits against councils that were flying the progress flag. It said that legislation meant that only the rainbow flag, with the six colours, and not the progress pride flag, which includes the triangle that represents the whole LGBTQ+ community, could be flown. Many people have accepted that the progress flag is the flag that we now fly. That flag means so much to so many: when they see it in their community for one day, one week or one month during Pride, they see that we are behind them and we support them.

Reform UK was threatening law suits and councils were having to take that flag down because of a minor difference in the guidance that said that they could fly only the rainbow flag. A group of us are challenging that and working with Ministers at the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government to try to have the guidance changed. But for goodness’ sake, what does it matter to Reform UK? This is a flag flying that does not harm Reform but shows people in our society that they are included and part of that society. This rhetoric has to stop.

We have seen Reform UK going further in councils that it controls, as has already been mentioned, by taking the rainbow flag down and not allowing it to be flown during Pride Month or at any time. Reform- led councils are even taking the Ukrainian flags down, even though a majority of us in this House are behind supporting people in Ukraine and we show that symbolically by flying that flag across many of our buildings.

As my hon. Friend knows, local Reform members in Bracknell tried to block Bracknell Forest council flying the progress flag in recent years, and he knows that I share his view that we need a common-sense fix for this. Frankly, it is a waste of council time to be debating this issue and putting it though planning, when we all want a common-sense approach that allows our communities to show that they are inclusive of everyone within those communities. This is a common-sense change that we could make.

I thank my hon. Friend for his support and for working alongside me to get this matter resolved.

I have read in the media that apparently the Leader of the Opposition has instructed Conservative councils across the country not to fly the progress flag and instead to fly only the original flag from the 1970s. Does my hon. Friend agree that it is shame to see the official Opposition joining in with some of the divisive politics and rhetoric that Reform has been engaging in?

That is a real shame. I say to the Leader of the Opposition and anybody else who is concerned about this: do not be concerned, fly the flag and be proud of everybody in the community. It is a real shame and the Conservatives need to consider whether they are doing the right thing by ordering councils not to fly that flag.

Now that Reform UK has taken over Essex county council, it has even sent out an order to Essex libraries not to allow LGBTQ+ and Pride events to take place in those libraries. What is next? Are we going to go back to section 28? I hope not. I remember section 28, because I was at school during that time, and what a horrendous time it was for me as a young gay man. I was not able to see a visible representation of somebody who I knew, deep down inside, was me. For many years, I therefore thought I was wrong. I thought that the way I felt—the fact that I fancied men, or boys at the time; I was only young—was wrong, and I really struggled with that. I and many young LGBT people during the ’80s and ’90s felt guilt because we could not see that representation, and we were being told that we were wrong. It took many, many years to overcome that.

I will never forget going to my first nightclub. Many of the nightclubs outside of London were either in boarded-up buildings or down in basements, so that people could not see what was happening inside and we were hidden away. Men dancing with men or women dancing with women—disgusting! That is how it was. For me, it felt like we were being hidden away, but we fought against that, and we are now out there and proud. We have fought hard for this, and I am not willing to go backwards.

We are at a turning point, especially with our trans community, who tell me that they feel unsafe, unwanted and like they do not belong. We are talking about 0.5% of our population here, but the way that the rhetoric is going at the moment, you would think they make up half of our population. Whatever our views on the code of practice, on the back of the Supreme Court ruling, we have a trans community who are scared. We have human beings who live in this country who are currently scared, and we cannot allow that to continue.

The last time that Labour was in government, we created a tolerant country, and as a Labour Government we aim to do the same thing this time. We cannot go backwards on much of the work that we did. I know that this Government are committed to doing the right thing for the LGBTQ+ community, and the Minister outlined some of that to us earlier, so I am pleased to see that the draft conversion practices Bill will come forward soon. I do believe that the Minister will bring it forward soon, and I look forward to seeing that happen.

On improvements to trans healthcare, we have heard about the work that my amazing friend the hon. Member for North Warwickshire and Bedworth (Rachel Taylor) brought forward alongside many of us to tackle hate crime and make such behaviour an aggravated offence, alongside other hate crimes, so work is going on.

Somebody reminded me a few days ago of a Martin Niemöller poem, and it really struck a chord with me. I want to share it with the House today:

“They came for the Socialists

And I did not speak out

Because I was not a Socialist

Then they came for the trade unionists

And I did not speak out

Because I was not a trade unionist

Then they came for the Jews

And I did not speak out

Because I was not a Jew

Then they came for me

And there was no one left

To speak out for me”.

I am glad that we have people to speak for us, such as our wonderful ally, my hon. Friend the Member for Luton North (Sarah Owen), and many others across this place.

Let me go back to the flyer. What comes after Pride? We are a long way from answering that question at the moment—much further away than I would like us to be at this point in time. For now, I commit publicly to my community: I am here for you, I will keep fighting for you, and I will keep speaking out for you. We must stand together against those who are trying to divide us and sow division. In this great country, we all belong in our communities, no matter who we love or how we identify.

Like so many others, I have been made to feel that I do not belong in my lifetime. I have been unable to walk along the street holding my husband’s hand. We have been the victims of a homophobic hate crime at our house. I am not going to go back to those times— I am not willing to go back to those times—and I know many across this House will stand with me on that.

As a former Pride organiser and a chair of trustees today, I thank all the amazing Pride organisers across the country who do so much hard work for their communities, often voluntarily and in their own time. I especially thank my local Pride, Southend Pride, and the Pride I founded, Basildon Pride. You all work so hard, because you believe in the cause you are fighting for; you believe in supporting your community and pushing forward to make things better. Do not stop, do not give up, and thank you.

It is a huge privilege to follow that incredible contribution from my hon. Friend the Member for Southend West and Leigh (David Burton-Sampson). I think many of us in this place recognise a lot of the experiences he talked about—many of us who know what it is to be holding hands with the person we love as we walk down the street, and then to see someone turn the corner and immediately let go of our loved one’s hand, because we do not know if it is safe to continue holding the person we love close.

I pay particular thanks to the Chair of the Women and Equalities Committee, my hon. Friend the Member for Luton North (Sarah Owen), for her powerful speech. She is doing incredible work to support LGBT+ rights, and she shared a powerful contribution from her constituent that it was very important to put on the record. I also thank my hon. Friend the Member for Macclesfield (Tim Roca) not only for his powerful words, but for giving Hansard a real job with his foreign language skills.

There are those who say that we do not need Pride any more—that we have achieved equality; that discrimination and hate based on sexuality and gender is no longer tolerated in this country—but there are also those who say that Pride is not suitable for children with “impressionable minds”, that gay men are “poofs” who mince about, and that if LGBT people “want acceptance”, they need to

“stop making a big song and dance about it”.

Homophobic comments like these will sadly be familiar to many in this Chamber and across the country. To my mind, such intolerant views are profoundly un-British; they are also the words of Reform’s candidate in the Makerfield by-election. I do not think there could be a clearer demonstration of why we still need Pride, and why we still need today’s debate, than that.

I am proud to say that my constituency of Bracknell hosts its own Pride, which will celebrate its fourth year this July. Growing up as a young gay boy in Berkshire—my hon. Friend the Minister grew up in Berkshire herself— I never thought I would see a time when not only Reading, but smaller towns across our county, had a Pride. Wokingham, Windsor, Newbury and other towns all now celebrate Pride every year. This is important, because Pride should be celebrated in every community so that every person can feel that they are loved and included, wherever they come from and whoever they are. I remember how, growing up gay, I sometimes felt like I would never belong. That could be an incredibly isolating feeling. Even in the 2000s, it was very scary for me to come out, knowing that not everyone would accept me for who I was. I take this opportunity to thank everyone who has worked so hard to bring Bracknell Forest Pride to where it is today, and I look forward to celebrating with them later this summer. I want every young LGBT+ person growing up in Bracknell Forest not to have to feel the fear I experienced growing up.

In her opening speech, the Minister rightly recognised that the progress made on LGBT+ rights has been hard won, and that the battle for a society where LGBT+ people can truly live without fear of hate and discrimination is far from over. Through the Crime and Policing Act 2026, this Government have acted to equalise hate crime law, so that victims of homophobic hate crimes can know that perpetrators will be fully held to account. We are bringing LGBT+ veterans the justice they deserve after the suffering they have endured, and we are issuing nearly half a million pounds-worth of specialist funding for LGBT+ domestic violence services, as well as committing £21 million over the next three years to support the LGBT community internationally in this time of increasing hostility towards our community nationally and globally. We must now go one step further by delivering on our manifesto commitment to a fully trans-inclusive ban on conversion therapy, as we have committed to doing in the King’s Speech.

Those measures are welcome and important, but I cannot in good conscience say that the path of progress in this country is straightforward, even now and even under this Government. I will briefly touch on the draft EHRC code of practice laid before Parliament, which many Members across the House have mentioned. I recognise and respect the judgment of the Supreme Court. It is a narrow and specific judgment about a specific aspect of the Equality Act, but I do not think that in order to make the world safer for women, we must make it less safe for trans people. I have real concerns that where the new EHRC guidance was supposed to bring clarity, it has instead brought only more anxiety, fear and confusion. The Government can and must find a way forward that balances the rights of women and of trans people. If we fail to do that, we risk the safety of both groups, and risk entrenching ourselves in a divisive culture war that we can and must move beyond.

I sit alongside the hon. Member on the Joint Committee on Human Rights, and he does phenomenal work there, including on the code of practice and the issues that he is outlining. Does he agree that it is worrying that whenever anyone in this House or outside this place tries to defend trans people, we see transphobia slip into homophobia and other languages of hate? The same tropes are being used against other people, in hopes of shutting them up. Does he share my concerns about the chilling effect that has on our democracy and the rights of LGBT people in the UK?

The hon. Member makes a profoundly important point. We have all seen the conversation around preserving the rights of everyone in our society—women and trans people—increasingly made into a political football and into something deeply personal. A lot of that is being driven by social media. Every Member who chooses to speak in today’s debate will have weighed up whether the comments they are making will be clipped and pushed out on social media, and whether they will receive abuse because of what they have chosen to say in this place. That is profoundly wrong. While I recognise that feelings from those on both sides of this issue often go well beyond the pale, it is incumbent on all of us in this place, whatever our views on this delicate and important issue, to treat the debate with the respect and dignity that those affected by it deserve. That is fundamentally where we need to get to on this important issue.

The hon. Member kindly highlights my role on the Joint Committee on Human Rights, on which I sit alongside him. That reminds me that the Gender Recognition Act 2004, which has been rightly championed in today’s debate, was passed in large part because of a ruling by the European Court of Human Rights that confirmed that trans people have the right not to be outed under article 8. A lot of us have spoken today about how important it is that we feel able to be our authentic selves and to come out. It is incumbent on us all to create a society where LGBT+ people feel that they can live their authentic lives and be honest about who they are. I also think that we all have a profound right to keep personal matters private, if that is what we choose. One of my concerns—it has been raised by many Members today—is that the draft code of practice undermines that human right to privacy, which is set out in law.

This is a really challenging debate to be part of. At times, it has been overwhelming, because I am so proud of my party’s record on LGBT+ rights and because, if I am being honest with myself, I think that reputation is at risk. We are at risk of losing our reputation as the party of equality, and our very soul as the Labour party, if we are not willing to stand up for the rights of everyone, including the LGBT+ community.

I want to finish on a slightly happier note by wishing everyone in Bracknell Forest and beyond a very happy Pride Month. This is a time to remember, to celebrate hard-won rights and freedoms, and to look forward with a renewed sense of community and hope for the future—for everyone in our great country: all members of the diverse communities that call it home, including, today in particular, all members of the LGBT+ community.

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Reading West and Mid Berkshire (Olivia Bailey) and the right hon. Member for Daventry (Stuart Andrew)—I will call him my friend—for starting the debate. I particularly welcome their comments about the importance of healthcare when it comes to supporting our LGBTQ community. Having spoken to LGBTQ+ people in Harlow, I know that there is still a real stigma when it comes to healthcare, and it is really important that we continue to talk about that.

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Luton North (Sarah Owen) for her incredibly powerful contribution. I did quite well—I lasted about 10 minutes into her speech before the tears came. She talks about LGBTQ+ rights in a way that is powerful and real. The bit that got me was when she started talking about her constituent’s experiences.

I do not want to get told off for not mentioning Harlow, so I pay tribute to everybody in my constituency who has worked so incredibly hard to make Harlow Pride a success. I feel very sorry for racist and homophobic people, because they miss out on the opportunity to go to some absolutely incredible events. I get to go to Pride events and to religious and cultural events, and I have a bloody good time. I am very proud of that.

I am a proud ally of the LGBTQ+ community, because I truly believe that no one should ever face persecution or abuse for being who they are, or for who they are in love with. That is hugely important. However, I am an LGBTQ+ ally who does not always get it right, and we should be honest with ourselves about that. It is always quite daunting to give the last speech in a debate, as I often do—except when I seconded the King’s Speech; just saying!—but it was particularly daunting today, because every single contribution was absolutely incredible. Every single Member who has spoken in this debate should be incredibly proud of themselves. My hon. Friend the Member for Southend West and Leigh (David Burton-Sampson), who has been a friend of mine for many years, said that he was doing his small part in this debate. No; he does a massive part to support the LGBTQ+ community in his constituency and the wider country, so he should be particularly proud.

I feel quite positive in this space. The last Labour Government introduced civil partnerships and adoption rights, and got rid of the divisive section 28. When I talk to previous teaching colleagues who are gay about section 28, they still shudder at it, and they talk about that time with anxiety and a huge degree of fear. As my hon. Friend said, there was a generation of young people who were terrified to admit who they were, and that must have been absolutely awful. I criticise the last Tory Government for a lot, and I am always wary about being nice about the Tories, because last time I was, the Leader of the Opposition tried to recruit me, which was a bit weird. However, I pay tribute to the last Conservative Government for the equal marriage legislation that they took through Parliament.

I am glad that the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for East Grinstead and Uckfield (Mims Davies), is in her place, because during the LGBT+ History Month debate last year, I had the opportunity to mention my late Uncle Stephen. She and the right hon. Member for Hertsmere (Sir Oliver Dowden), who is not here, said, “Hear, hear” when I mentioned my uncle, and I am genuinely very grateful for that. I again proudly say the name Stephen Vince in this place. He was let down by our society because he was gay, but he was one of the warmest, kindest people I have had the opportunity to know. I am very proud to be able to talk about him, and the fact that he was my uncle. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear.”] Thank you. May he never be forgotten.

However, I also stand here with some fears. My hon. Friend the Member for Southend West and Leigh—he is getting a lot of mentions today—talked about the decision by Reform-led Essex county council to ban Pride advertising in libraries, including in Harlow, and I am very concerned about that. My hon. Friend the Member for Bracknell (Peter Swallow) spoke of his concerns—as did my hon. Friend the Member for Southend West and Leigh, to mention him again—about people, not necessarily from Reform, deciding which books people should be able to read. I say this a little bit in jest, but I think hon. Members will understand why I say it: my son does not want to be a hungry caterpillar. The idea that reading books with LGBTQ+ role models in them will suddenly make young people gay is just nonsense, is it not? Let us be really honest about that.

Those books are really important for young people who are LGBTQ+ and are looking for direction and guidance, but it is also important for people like me to read about the LGBTQ+ community in books, and for that to be commonplace. I am a bit of a “Star Trek” fan—I am going off on a tangent, Madam Deputy Speaker, but this was not so long ago—and I remember how, in “Deep Space Nine”, Jadzia Dax kissed another woman. Do other hon. Members remember that episode? There was outrage, and that is just unbelievable to me. We should be really proud that we live in a society where members of the LGBT community, who should be able to walk down the street holding hands, can do so and not feel the way my hon. Friend the Member for Bracknell described.

I am sure the hon. Gentleman looks fantastic when he turns up to Pride events in the glad rags that I am sure he wears. An interesting thing happened to me a few weeks back when I went for dinner at my mum’s. My little niece was there with my middle sister. My middle sister and I have a very interesting relationship; we do not get along very well. With me, I had a friend—a Liberal Democrat member, who was off out knocking on doors ahead of the local elections—and my little niece, who is at primary school, turned to me and said, “Is that your friend or partner?”. It was an incredibly poignant moment for me, and I thought, “Gosh, I may not necessarily see eye to eye with my sister, but she’s done a good job raising her kid.” Does my hon. Friend agree that the world is a better place when kids have an open mind and can ask such questions, and are inquisitive and not hateful?

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his intervention, although I do not thank him for overtaking me in the marathon on mile 5—a long way ahead of the right hon. Member for Basildon and Billericay (Mr Holden). The insight into the hon. Gentleman’s family Christmases is fascinating, but he makes a valid point, as he often does in this place. He gives me the opportunity to mention that I used to be a teacher, which I have not done yet today—[Laughter.] I thank him for that. [Interruption.] I did not teach in Harlow, actually! I think about when I first started teaching in 2005, up until when I finished teaching in 2020. I did see that shift. When I first started teaching, a young person who was openly gay would have been subject to ridicule. I am not saying that we are in a perfect world where that no longer happens, but I certainly saw more young people at school in 2020 who were happy to be open about their sexuality, and that is something we should celebrate.

There are challenges, too. I do not want to end on a negative, but I have just started reading Esther Ghey’s book about the horrendous murder of her daughter. It shows the horrendous impact of transphobia and we need to be really mindful of that, although equally there is hope.

As a fellow Essex MP, I too was shocked by the decision taken by Essex county council on displaying Pride and LGBT+ material in libraries. Today I learned that, unfortunately, it appears that my own council of Thurrock, which is now run by Reform UK, seems to have directed the removal of Pride advertisements and LGBT+ awareness material from the Thameside complex in Grays. Ironically, the complex will be hosting Pride in June, which the Pride organisation in Thurrock is paying for fully. Does my hon. Friend agree that this is a real backward step in what should be a safe space for the LGBTQ+ community in Thurrock?

I thank my honourable bestie for her contribution. I absolutely agree with everything she has just said. I send my solidarity to members of Thurrock Pride and thank them for all they do. As my hon. Friend the Member for Southend West and Leigh mentioned earlier—I will mention him again—all the Pride groups across the country are hugely important. They make a difference to all our constituents who may be LGBTQ+ and are perhaps wary because of some of the things we have talked about today. They do a huge amount to support people with their mental wellbeing and to make them feel part of the community, so I really want to thank them for that.

I will say to my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) that there is also hope. The hope is all around us, because there has been representation in this debate from five political parties—I think I have counted that up right—with, yes, one notable absence. We should have pride that, whatever differences we may have, we all agree that it is hugely important that we support our LBGTQ+ colleagues, so I feel there is some hope.

Finally, I am saddened by what my hon. Friends the Members for Thurrock and for Southend West and Leigh mentioned about some of the decisions being made by councils that have recently changed political affiliation. It looks as though we will have to fight the battles of the past with regard to LGBTQ+ rights, but I say to everybody who has spoken in this debate that if we have to fight those fights again, we will fight those fights again and I will stand there and fight with you.

That brings us to the Front-Bench contributions. I call the shadow Minister.

I thank all hon. Members who have contributed to the debate. It is always a pleasure to speak on behalf of His Majesty’s loyal Opposition. It has been a thoughtful, emotional and wide-ranging debate. The Minister’s opening speech highlighted her joy at being at the Dispatch Box. Her story reminded us that so much has been delivered by people like her, who we all know locally and nationally, who continue to do so much. She spoke about hope and unity over division and hate.

I am always so proud to share the Opposition Dispatch Box with my right hon. Friend the Member for Daventry (Stuart Andrew). He spoke about how we balance trans people’s rights and women’s rights, and how we talk about dignity, respect, compassion and love. He speaks from such personal experience, I am so proud to share this debate with him and I am sorry he cannot be here for the closing of it.

The hon. Member for Glasgow North (Martin Rhodes) spoke powerfully about how Pride is a place. It was a beautiful speech, and I thank him for sharing it.

Pride should be an opportunity not only to celebrate LBGT people across our society but to recognise those who have lived with discrimination throughout history and to reflect honestly, as my right hon. Friend the Member for Daventry did when he talked about his younger life. We have done that today when addressing the disparities that remain. We continue to renew our commitment to ensuring that Britain maintains its long and proud tradition of liberty and tolerance, and that we are truly one of the best places in the world to live as a LGBT person. We all want and need it to stay that way.

Madam Deputy Speaker, I know that you are particularly excited to be at Romsey’s own mini-Pride, the One Romsey festival, next weekend, which is now celebrating its second year—it is maybe a chance for you not to wear black.

The Chair of the Women and Equalities Committee, the hon. Member for Luton North (Sarah Owen), was powerful in her position and her thoughts, as always. She mentioned that equalities debates always take place on a Thursday. I love being here on a Thursday— I would be here every day of the week if they let me—but I agree that it is challenging for some of our colleagues to join us. I agreed with her statement that it is not one or the other in terms of rights—I have never thought that.

It was important that the hon. Member for Aberdeen North (Kirsty Blackman) spoke about the time people need to experiment with who they are and who they want to be. I wanted to be Madonna, Kim Wilde and Debbie Harry when growing up. Guess what, I still want to be—you can tell from the black eyeliner. The hon. Lady’s speech was a reminder that we all go through stages, and that we need to give young people the space to learn. I really appreciated her speaking up in that way.

My party, and society more broadly, has gone through a profound shift in attitudes in recent decades. I will point out a few examples of that shift, and the pride that we have in our party: the election of Ruth Davidson—with apologies to the hon. Member for Aberdeen North—who was the first openly gay leader of a mainstream political party and brought so much to politics in Scotland; Justine Greening, the first openly lesbian Cabinet member; and the ennoblement of my friend, Debbie Stedman-Scott, an outstanding public servant and colleague.

The hon. Member rightly says that much progress has been made towards equality across the LGBT family, and that many lesbians are now standing and being prominent voices in the political sphere. However, lesbian voices are so often under-represented in politics. We face distinct challenges in political representation, and in ensuring our particular social and economic experiences are reflected in policy. Will the hon. Member join me in my call to encourage more lesbians—and more people from across the LGBT+ community—to stand for elections at whatever level of local or national Government they choose?

I am going to make the exact point that the hon. Lady raises in my later remarks, so I wholeheartedly agree with her. My colleagues have succeeded on merit, but, to the hon. Lady’s point, they were asked to step forward, be part of things and stand. They did not rely on their identity; it was talent, dedication and leadership. That is in everybody, however we identify.

As has been said many times in this debate, who someone loves should not affect their success. There should be no barrier to someone’s success and ambition, and who someone loves should not be the measure of what their ambition or success can be. Pride is there for everyone to be represented equally and for us not to be divided. Safe, fair and equal is true equality for all of us.

I am concerned that in some quarters, as has been raised today, Pride is not being used to unite; instead, it is being used to inflame tensions. It is important that we recognise that. Let us be honest: we saw this, in a way, with Monday’s statement, when we heard speaker after speaker saying that the EHRC code of practice is exclusionary and anti-trans. We have heard some of that today. I fundamentally do not believe that, although I acknowledge that some people have said that today and that they do believe it. That is, of course, the reality of this place. I reiterate that I believe that that characterisation is not correct. The Equality Act remains clear in its protections, including those related to gender reassignment. The code reinforces rather than diminishes those protections. It is important, as I think we all agree, that the code works and that it does not diminish wide-ranging, hard-fought rights. Of course, it reflects on other areas, such as age and disability.

It is striking that in the debate earlier this week we did not roundly acknowledge the importance of lesbianism, which the hon. Member for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke) has just referred to, and the fact that the code needs to work for same-sex groups, particularly lesbian organisations. I have spoken about this before. These groups have often found themselves at the sharp end of an increasingly fraught debate about the relationship between biological sex, gender identity and sexual orientation. There have been credible reports of lesbian groups being deplatformed, pressured or silenced simply for asserting their same-sex attraction. That is the reality for some women. The fact that in 2024—just a couple of years ago—a representative of the LGB Alliance was required to offer a legal definition of the term “lesbian” in court is still, frankly, extraordinary.

The situation reflects a wider confusion that risks eroding hard-won protections. We should be wary— I think we have all said that in the Chamber this afternoon—of repeating past mistakes of marginalising and dismissing same-sex attraction in particular. As we heard from my right hon. Friend the Member for Daventry, lesbian women played a vital role during the AIDS crisis in supporting gay men during some of the most difficult chapters of our history. That solidarity should never be forgotten, and neither should it be replaced with division.

I know that some Members in the House are supporting the measures in early-day motion 240. I believe they are doing so because they have not necessarily fully appreciated the implications for women’s rights, particularly for lesbians who rely on the clarity of law to maintain their safe single-sex spaces. I welcome the thoughtful speech made by the hon. Member for Macclesfield (Tim Roca), in which he covered his views and approach to that. I think that does accord. It is clear from what has been discussed around the code of practice that it is vital that healthcare for all matters. That is absolutely something we need to look at.

On flags, I personally think we need less tribalism and more grown-up and pragmatic conversations. We can and must protect women’s rights, respect trans rights and find workable solutions. I do not think we should be arguing about flags. We can stand up for people, communities and, crucially, harmony. The Conservatives do that through the LGBT+ Conservatives. I am going to invite the hon. Member for Harlow (Chris Vince) out on the best night ever—once again, a Conservative willing to let him come out on the best night ever.

The Conservative party roundly believes that everyone should be treated equally before the law, regardless of their race, sex or sexual orientation.

The hon. Lady just said that we should not be arguing about flags, and I totally agree with her. In my view, it should be up to councils and community groups to decide the version of the pride flag that they choose to fly, whether it be the traditional pride flag or the progress pride flag. I do not think that that is arguing about flags; it is giving people choice. Is the hon. Lady comfortable with the Leader of the Opposition ordering Conservatives up and down the country not to support the flying of the progress pride flag, and does she not think that taking away that choice is, in fact, creating the argument?

I am wearing my Conservative pride badge, so I am quite happy to wear a flag, as are many in our party. As I say, the Conservative party roundly believes in treating everyone equally before the law, regardless of race, sex or sexual orientation.

The original rainbow flag is a widely recognised symbol. I am wearing it today to show respect and support for gay people. My personal view is that the traditional rainbow flag already rightly brings us together and has a sense of unity. Its purpose should be to bring us together, not to divide us. The progress pride flag, by contrast, can be seen by some as a symbol of identity politics, somewhat atomising society into different and divisive identities. Therefore, I am comfortable with our position in not being behind it in the way that the hon. Member described, but I fully respect his opinion, and I fully respect that other people feel differently.

Will the hon. Lady give way?

No, I will conclude.

There has been a lot of agreement in the Chamber, but let’s be real: it is not going to be universal—that is the reality of politics and life today. Let me reiterate the phrase “safe, fair and equal”—there should be equality under the law regardless of race, sex or sexual orientation. That is my view.

It would be remiss of me not to give an update from the Dispatch Box about Jed and Elliot’s wedding— I know that you were waiting for the next instalment, Madam Deputy Speaker. Next month on the Isle of Wight, we will finally see the wedding. It is one of the most exciting things to be happening, and I am delighted to be part of that celebration, as are so many. I am also delighted to be reading at the wedding.

I am very proud of the Conservatives’ successes. We have heard from others about same-sex marriage, the Turing law pardons, the apology to LGBT veterans, progress on HIV testing and PrEP, fair blood donation rules and the real practical progress that we have made to change lives.

We all welcome Pride Month as a time to celebrate the contributions of the LGBT people that we know and love both locally and in our national life, and we want more of them in our national life. We honour the progress made and commit ourselves to work for a future always grounded in fairness, respect and genuine equality for all under the law.

It is an honour to close this debate on behalf of the Government. I would like to begin by thanking Members across the House for their thoughtful and powerful contributions this afternoon. These are always the best debates to be in, and today has been no exception.

We have heard speeches about the progress won, the challenges that remain and the lived reality of LGBT+ people in communities across the country. I would like to pick out some highlights from the contributions this afternoon. The right hon. Member for Daventry (Stuart Andrew) opened the debate with a very moving speech, which included some upsetting testimony about his own personal experience of assault, and I commend his bravery in sharing that. He was also right to say that Pride is not just about big parades; it is about the teenager who is scared and alone. Pride is indeed a promise to remember those people and ensure that we bring our community together.

The right hon. Member for Daventry also asked a number of questions about LGBT+ health. We know that LGBT+ people experience significant health inequalities. That is why we asked Dr Michael Brady to undertake a review, which we will publish soon. We are committed to improving adult gender services, and our 10-year health plan will tackle health inequalities. I also thank the right hon. Member for Daventry for his support for our ambition to end new HIV cases by 2030.

The Chair of the Women and Equalities Committee, my hon. Friend the Member for Luton North (Sarah Owen), made a powerful speech. She is a powerful advocate for equality in this place. I thank her for her comments on the code and I note that her Committee will have an important session next week with the chair of the EHRC.

I also thank my hon. Friend for sharing Teraina’s powerful story. I commend Teraina for her bravery and for coming to share her fears with my hon. Friend. I agree, though, that Teraina’s health is important. I just want to say to Teraina: your safety matters. It is protected in law, we have strengthened hate crime laws and we are clear that trans people should not be left without facilities, and the code gives a number of examples of how service providers can ensure that. My hon. Friend is also right when she says that this is not a debate on women’s rights versus trans rights. We can live together, in her words, with joy and love.

The hon. Member for Guildford (Zöe Franklin) spoke about young people. She is right, and it is wonderful to see the totally different approach that the younger generations have to questions of sexuality and gender identity. I join her in celebrating that. She also asked me for clarity on the conversion practices timeline. I will say again that I am working really hard to publish our draft Bill as soon as possible.

My hon. Friend the Member for Macclesfield (Tim Roca) made a powerful speech. He is right that his election as the first gay MP for Macclesfield matters. I also thank everyone he mentioned from Macclesfield Pride and Stride for Pride. I understand the concerns that he outlined and the fear that he described in the trans community. I say again: every trans person in this country deserves to live life safely and with dignity and respect. On the ILGA ranking, I want to see us climb those rankings again. I am proud that we will host the International Day against Homophobia, Biphobia and Transphobia forum in London next year, which will be an important moment for LGBT rights in this country.

The hon. Member for Aberdeen North (Kirsty Blackman) made a wide-ranging speech—it was a very good speech—but I will pick out a few points. On IVF, I will take away her comments and say that we recognise the unacceptable variability in access to funded fertility services. I agree with her and my hon. Friend the Member for Basingstoke (Luke Murphy) about the importance of not forgetting the “B” in all our debates.

My hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow North (Martin Rhodes) made another moving speech. I remember the one he made in the last debate, when I had the pleasure of listening to him from the Front Bench. I found that a powerful speech then and I am glad that his constituent found it to be important and powerful too. I agree with my hon. Friend in his sentiment that Pride is not just a march but is everywhere—I thank him for that.

The hon. Member for Brighton Pavilion (Siân Berry) reflected a real fear among her LGBT constituents. It is a fear that the Government recognise, and we are determined to ensure that every trans person can live safely and with dignity and respect. My hon. Friend the Member for Basingstoke is right that we must never stop fighting for progress. I also greatly value his advocacy for his trans constituents.

Like my hon. Friend the Member for Southend West and Leigh (David Burton-Sampson), my thoughts and best wishes go to the families of all those who lost their lives in the tragic Royal Navy helicopter crash yesterday. I think him for his remarks on that. I also thank him for his campaigning on the pride flag. He is right to challenge all those who want to stop the LGBT+ community expressing its pride. I join him in thanking all the activists in our communities, who make Pride Month and the whole year so joyous for the LGBT community.

I thank the Minister for her warm words on the fantastic speeches that we have heard and the action that so many Members have taken in and out of this place. It has been mentioned that one party has wanted to stop Pride and to stop pride flags being flown, but there are actually two: Restore and Reform. Who are they working for? Does the Minister agree that we need to look at not just what they are saying but who they are being funded by, whether it is Elon Musk—a transphobic megalomaniac—or overseas crypto bros with very dubious records?

I thank my hon. Friend for that important intervention. I will certainly challenge—and it is important that we all continue to challenge—any hate in our politics, wherever we find it.

I want to say a big thank you to my hon. Friend the Member for Southend West and Leigh for all the work that he does in campaigning for LGBT rights.

My hon. Friend the Member for Bracknell (Peter Swallow) made a very powerful speech. As somebody who grew up gay in his constituency, may I say how glad I am that the LGBT community in Bracknell Forest have him as their representative? He made a powerful speech, and I agree with him that we must conduct all our debates with the dignity and respect that the people involved in those debates deserve.

My hon. Friend the Member for Harlow (Chris Vince) is a fantastic ally and a fantastic champion for Harlow. Stephen Vince sounds like a wonderful uncle and a wonderful person, and I thank my hon. Friend for bringing Stephen’s story to the House again today. I agree with his points about the importance of LGBT representation in literature, which was very important to me. I am delighted to have seen the expansion of LGBT literature in recent times, which has been an important step forward.

The range of voices we have heard today reminds us of something important: that Pride is not a single story. There are many stories—some of struggle, some of joy—but all are connected by a shared demand for dignity and respect. As I said in my opening speech, Pride is not just about celebrating how far we have come, but about recognising how far we still have to go. The hon. Members who have spoken in today’s debate are right: we have so much more to do.

This Government will continue to stand with LGBT+ people in this country and around the world. We have acted to right the historic wrongs committed against LGBT veterans, committed to a trans-inclusive ban on conversion practices, equalised hate crime laws, funded LGBT+ focused domestic abuse services, put our HIV plan into action, and invested millions to promote and protect LGBT rights globally. We will always champion unity and hope over hatred and division.

Pride is not just about celebrating our LGBT+ community. Pride is also an antidote to shame. Our task is to ensure that every LGBT+ person can live openly and happily, safe in the knowledge that this is a country that embraces them for who they are and that will always protect their rights.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this House has considered Pride Month.