Apologies for the delay, Members. We had the Hungarian ambassador with us today. We have quite a lot of ambassadorial visits to this place, which is to the good. We now move back to the Matter of the Day.

First, I want to turn to some comments that the leader of the Opposition made before the business was suspended for Question Time. He said that it was "dehumanising" in some way to trans individuals. I take issue with that. In fact, all that I have heard from this side is that single-sex spaces need to be protected and that biological males should not be using female toilets. Those are not controversial statements. In fact, the Supreme Court referenced some of those on the way through. It is also clear from listening to some of the other Members who have spoken so far that they think that, somehow, trans rights have evaporated. That is simply not the case and is a straw man argument. In fact, trans individuals are still protected under a whole range of equality legislation, including the Equality Act. I further make it clear that, in my view, discrimination is wrong and always will be wrong.

Getting back to what we are discussing this afternoon, it has already been referenced that the Supreme Court identified that the terms "man", woman" and "sex" in the Equality Act do refer to biological sex, not certified or asserted. That is a victory for women's rights and for basic biological facts. Today, I want to pay tribute to some people who have brought us this far in this area and to the bravery and sacrifices that some women have shown and made. I pay tribute in particular to For Women Scotland, which took this case and took on a Government to get the case won. It was supported by a whole range of other organisations such as Sex Matters and the Women's Rights Network. Very recently, my party met the Women's Rights Network Northern Ireland, and we made clear our continued commitment to stand up for women's rights in Northern Ireland. Many of the campaigners who fought for this have lost jobs, lost friends and family, been vilified as bigots and subjected to torrents of abuse; in fact, someone recently called for witch-burning to come back because they wanted to burn J K Rowling. She is not alone. The struggle for justice in this area by such women as Rosie Duffield, Sharron Davies, Helen Joyce, Susan Smith and Kathleen Stock has been vindicated by the Supreme Court ruling.

In closing, following the Supreme Court ruling, I wonder whether members of Sinn Féin, Alliance and the SDLP will have gleaned the additional insight and wisdom required to answer the tough question that they have so far grappled and struggled with —

The Member's time is up.

— the answer to which has eluded them: what is a woman?

I wish to contribute to this Matter of the Day and appreciate that it has been tabled. It is timely, as it allows us to put on record our thoughts on the Supreme Court ruling. It is an extremely sensitive issue. I emphasise the fact that we need to look at the equality law in its totality and to think about non-discrimination against all nine protected categories in Great Britain, including sex and gender reassignment. Although the ruling does not apply directly to us in Northern Ireland, it means that discrimination and harassment based on someone's sex or on gender reassignment are and will be regarded as unlawful by the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom under the terms and definitions laid out.

There have already been complaints about the guidance that was provided by the Equality and Human Rights Commission in England prior to and subsequent to the ruling, and there are concerns that the ruling does not provide clarity on what it will mean in practice for people on whom it impacts. Given the sensitivities and our position in Northern Ireland as a distinct legal jurisdiction with devolved equality law, we need to act to ensure that there is clarity on what it means here. The first thing that we need is a consistent approach by public bodies that is based on guidance from the Equality Commission and the Human Rights Commission here in Northern Ireland. I sincerely hope that they will provide and publish their guidance, imminently. Today, I emailed both organisations asking for a meeting. Although the ruling was quite clear, the legal ramifications in Northern Ireland, given our particular circumstances, are complex. We are already seeing public authorities making assumptions about how the ruling is to be applied, but it is essential that its application be based on appropriate guidance from the appropriate commissions.

The second key aspect is that this is just the latest issue to reinforce the need for a single equality Act in Northern Ireland. Currently, we operate according to section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act, which was already somewhat outdated by the time the Equality Act 2010 was passed for Great Britain, and a scattering of other legislation and regulations, some of which are decades out of date. That creates a minefield, which needs a clear application of the law and an ending of direct and indirect discrimination and harassment. I trust that the ruling, whatever our views on it may be, has at least demonstrated the merit of a single equality Act here in Northern Ireland and of courts providing clarification on such legislation once it is produced. We cannot continue to be left behind in this regard.

I welcome the ruling. As my colleague has said, it is a victory not just for women in the UK but for common sense. Nevertheless, I express my regret that this was the length to which women in this country had to go to ensure that their spaces were protected and their very existence recognised, defined and protected from biological men. It seems to me that, of late and until now — after hundreds of years of fighting for rights and equality — the most fundamental of rights for women and girls were being eroded and erased under the guise of so-called progress, even in language, never mind definition. Women are not merely "people who menstruate" or "people who chest feed". Let me be clear: women did not view any of this as progress or advancement for them. At every turn, as these changes were being made for biological males, it was at the expense of biological women and their rights and needs. It is women who have suffered and watched as their rights have been eroded and their safety compromised.

Some in the House have been seeking to dilute women and their rights by making them invisible — erasing their very definition, as per biology, and regardless of their basic respect, safety and privacy. Yet those same Members, without a hint of irony or self-awareness, will come to the House and wax lyrical on their supposed prioritisation of the safety of women and girls from violence, abuse, predatory behaviour and intimidation, yet they see no problem in permitting biological males with full male genitalia into women's safe and private spaces and into their sport, which presents enormous physical risk. There are those who argue that there is no difference and no distinction in performance in sport. However, if that were the case, why is sport segregated at all? Nonsense has prevailed for too long at the expense of half our population. In the course of this Matter of the Day, many have sought to acknowledge the trans community and its needs, but this whole issue is not about trans; it is about women — biological women. For once, what about acknowledging them, their protection and their needs?

Following the ruling, we saw criminal damage to female statues and footage and photographs of takeovers of women's toilets in order to film videos and protests outside women's toilets. Hence, women and girls have had to run that gauntlet to use the bathroom. Is that in any way acceptable? I look forward to hearing from each Minister about the implications of the ruling and actions across each of their Departments, given the Supreme Court's indications on the judgement's likely highly persuasive and consequential precedent for local courts. Women in Northern Ireland deserve the same legal definitions, equality and protections as every other woman in the UK, and they will accept nothing less. As I have said in the Chamber many times, I reiterate this: there is no place for biological males in women's safe and single-sex spaces, including changing rooms, shower rooms, toilets, sports and even prison cells.

A Member:

Hear, hear.

I thank my colleague Jonny Buckley for bringing this Matter of the Day to the House. It is very timely, and it is important that the House has the measure of what the Supreme Court ruling was about. It was about the Equality Act 2010 and how the terms "women" and "sex" refer strictly to biological sex.

The issue at hand, though, is about a number of things: the truth; women's rights in a number of areas, including single-sex spaces and their privacy and safety; and women competing in sports with a fair chance, an equal playing field and in safety. It is also about how some parties and politicians have fumbled their way through the matter, trying to be somewhat populist, denying truth and creating dangers for women and girls everywhere.

When you want to help people, you tell them the truth; when you want to help yourself, you tell people what they want to hear. That has been the maxim of many parties in the House, namely the Alliance Party, the SDLP and Sinn Féin. Their populist stance has put women in danger. Their populist stance has put women and girls, who already feel so vulnerable in this day and age, at risk.

There was absolutely no doubt, given that women fought so hard for so many decades to maintain and achieve rights, that, when we talked about the trans movement, it was very clear that the diminishing of women's rights was taking place. Of course, there should be a place for trans people to have privacy and safety, but that should not be at the expense of women's safety and privacy or their private spaces, toilets and changing areas. How have we come to this place? How have we been practising this madness?

I am glad of the Supreme Court ruling, because it has clarified things, but I did not need that ruling to know the truth and to know what is a woman. I hope that the parties opposite that have grappled with and fumbled their way through the issue now have a clear definition of what a woman is and will practise that in their politics for everyone's safety, including for trans, but more so for women.

A Member:

Hear, hear.

I broadly welcome the clarity that the UK Supreme Court ruling has provided, not because it excludes but because it gives certainty where there has long been uncertainty, particularly in law, policy and public service delivery, which is where it is of interest to us as policymakers.

Some have criticised the fact that the issue went before the courts at all. I disagree. In our democracy, the legislature makes the law, the Government implement it, but it is the judiciary and, ultimately, the Supreme Court that interpret it. That is not an accident; it is a deliberate and vital part and structure of our democracy. The courts ensure that the law is applied fairly, consistently and in line with the rights and protections that Parliament has set out. Especially when society changes and new complexities arise, it is not only appropriate but essential that the courts fulfil that role.

The judgement speaks to the legal definition of sex, a biological characteristic that is distinct from gender, which is about personal identity. Both matter. Both deserve recognition and respect. However, there are times, especially in areas like medicine, safeguarding, data collection and single-sex spaces, when sex and gender need to be considered separately to ensure that protections work as intended and why we segregated on the basis of sex in the first place. That is not a denial of anyone's identity or worth; it is about ensuring that law and policy are clear, effective and fair to everyone where it is appropriate.

I want to be absolutely clear, however, that the ruling must not be twisted into justification for hatred of or discrimination against transgender individuals. That would be a profound misuse of both the court's reasoning and our broader democratic values. Trans people are a valued part of our society. They deserve dignity, safety and legal protection just like anyone else. Predators are something else.

The law exists to safeguard rights, not to erode them. In a world that is changing, sometimes rapidly, the role of the courts in interpreting and clarifying the law is not just helpful but essential to a just and stable society. We must use that clarity not to divide but to strengthen our commitment to fairness, respect and humanity for all.

I welcome the ruling of the UK Supreme Court. It is disappointing, as others have said, that it took this case to go to court to confirm what we already know: the definition of a woman. Over the past year, I have been working on progressing a private Member's Bill on women and girls in sport, because I feel really strongly about that as a woman and a mother of two young girls who are feeling the vulnerabilities and facing challenges in accessing sport. I am taking my opportunity in the House to speak out on that.

We need to stand up in this place to support and champion women and girls in sport here. We need to remove barriers that exist and progress serious issues, including safeguarding, access to fair competition, medical research on women in sports and securing safe single-sex spaces for women and girls to change and shower when accessing sport. For me, a key part of progressing the Bill has been raising awareness of existing laws that are in place in Northern Ireland that protect the integrity of female sports. The sporting bodies should be confident in their application of those laws, even before taking account of this judgement.

The ruling of the UK Supreme Court is a victory for common sense, as others have said. It is an important reminder of women's rights across the United Kingdom. I look forward to using it to strengthen the principles in my Bill as it progresses. Women's rights in modern society have been hard fought for. The ruling is important: it is an important step towards ensuring that those rights are not diminished. As a female MLA in the House, I am proud to stand here for women's rights.

Time is up for further statements.