This followed his apparent backdown in June on the National-NZ First coalition commitment to cut funding for sporting bodies that have gender rules compromising fairness.
Sports Minister Chris Bishop told Sport NZ to review its principles for transgender inclusion after his hands-off approach triggered a deluge of feedback from National voters threatening to vote elsewhere.
The issue was part of NZ First’s 2023 election campaign, and its coalition agreement with National committed the Government to “ensure publicly funded sporting bodies support fair competition that is not compromised by rules relating to gender”.
The principles are not mandatory, and it is up to each code to determine its own policy. But with Sport NZ due to invest $9.3 million in 38 sports at the community level in 2024, the coalition commitment triggered concerns over whether funding would be halted for codes that welcomed trans women to compete with cisgender women.
In June, following a flow of briefings from Sport NZ, Bishop appeared to step back from the more hands-on policy in the coalition agreement. Instead, he said it was a “tricky issue” and he was taking “a watching brief”.
“Community-level sports are supporting the inclusion of people in the gender they identify as – but there are exceptions, including on the grounds of fairness of competition and the safety of participants. In my view this is appropriate,” he told the Herald in June.
Minister for Sport and Recreation Chris Bishop. Photo / Mark Mitchell
In October, however, he ordered Sport NZ to rewrite the principles to reflect the importance of safety and fairness, as well as inclusion.
Three things happened in the interim that could have all played a role in Bishop’s change of heart:
The emails in Bishop’s inbox, responding to his “watching brief” comments.
‘Grow a pair’
An Official Information Act response reveals only one email about the policy before his comments in June - from Save Women’s Sports Australasia. Bishop declined their request for a meeting, saying the current policy settings were appropriate.
After his June comments, however, the number of emails quickly escalated. The 40-odd messages featured a range of negative reactions, from “disgusted” to “dumfounded (sic)”.
Some were anatomical in nature (”women are born with vaginas, men are born with a penis”), while other feedback told Bishop to “man up” or to “grow a pair”.
A common thread was the competitive advantages a trans woman might have over a cisgender woman.
“We do not want to compete against males who despite being neutered will never have to deal with the challenges of monthly bleeding, cramping, bloating, sore breasts, hormonal fluctuations and mood swings or pregnancy, child birth and breast feeding throughout their sporting career,” said one email.
Said another: “People who go through male puberty gain considerable advantages over females in strength, power, reach, and stamina, that are not reduced by testosterone suppression.”
Many were from purported National supporters threatening to take their votes elsewhere:
“One of the reasons I voted was National appeared to support the protection of female only spaces. Was my vote wasted?”
“Unless the party changes direction I will endeavour to work tirelessly to see you removed from govt (sic) in the next election.”
“I know Winston will stick to his guns.”
Others shared personal experiences: “My friend’s daughter missed out on a spot in the year 6 girls running finals at school due to [a] biological male competing as a girl in the finals. How upsetting with all the training she had done.”
A purportedly gay woman said she understood the importance of self-expression for health and wellbeing.
“On that basis I have no issue with people who decide they want to express themselves as the opposite gender they were born into – transgender. I do however take exception when trans women are provided the opportunity to compete as a ‘women’ in sport.”
Bishop responded to them all in mid-July with the same generic email, saying he would uphold its coalition commitment, and reiterating his stance that it’s a “tricky area” and he’s “keeping a watching brief on the issue”.
Sport New Zealand chief executive Raelene Castle. Photo / Photosport
‘No conclusive evidence’
The views in the emails are not representative of the population, and Bishop had to balance them against advice from Sport NZ, which included:
“The evidence around safety concerns with the inclusion of transgender women in female sport is not conclusive at this stage.”
“There is no conclusive evidence about the potential impact on female sport from the inclusion of transgender women.”
“There is no conclusive evidence that transgender women have an advantage over cisgender peers in community sport.”
The principles were founded on inclusion; Sport NZ noted a 2018 national survey of transgender and non-binary people found that only 14% participated in organised sport, and 61% were worried about how they would be treated.
“Participation in sport is a powerful means of social inclusion and a basic human right,” Sport NZ chief executive Raelene Castle wrote in a briefing to Bishop in January.
“Transgender people live, work and play in New Zealand and it is important our sporting communities reflect this.”
But compromised fairness is a common experience or perspective among supporters of the NZ First policy in the coalition agreement. So how can fairness in community sport be assured, while also supporting people to identify with their chosen gender?
Having a separate trans-category would be challenging, as they comprise only 0.14% of the population; this means such a category would likely only have a few participants, or even only one.
Mountain biker Kate Weatherly in action. Photo / Fraser Britton/Crankworx 2019
Not one size fits all
The trickiness of the issue was encapsulated by transgender athlete and two-time national champion mountain biker Kate Weatherly: “People must choose between participating in a sport they love, and invalidating their identity or leaving the community and sport to continue being who they are. That is profoundly sad. That is as good as exclusion.”
Many sporting bodies support the guiding principles. NZ Cricket even publicly resisted the coalition commitment at the risk of losing its $425,000 in Government funding.
Others mitigate biological differences in different ways. Triathlon NZ and Boxing NZ both have open categories, while the latter also has weight categories.
NZ Rugby League enforces participation based on birth gender from age 13, while NZ Rugby is developing a policy that looks to accommodate safety as well as inclusion – where possible.
Others, including Netball NZ, require participants at certain levels to have either undertaken hormone therapy, have testosterone levels below a stated level, or provide a document confirming their legal gender.
Only 14% of transgender or non-binary people participate in organised sport.
Discrimination protection in Canada, but not NZ
In September, a Sport NZ briefing to Bishop summarised what happens in the UK, Canada and Australia.
National sporting entities in Canada and Australia support the inclusion of transgender athletes, and while this is also the position in the UK, “their advice does not prioritise inclusion over fairness or safety”, the briefing said.
In each of these countries, as in New Zealand, it is up to the sporting codes to decide an appropriate policy.
But an inclusive policy is arguably mandatory in Canada, because of human rights protections against discrimination based on gender identity.
Human rights laws in New Zealand, the UK and Australia allow for discrimination in sports contexts where there are differences in competitors’ strength, stamina, or physique (for people aged over 12 in New Zealand and Australia).
“While we do not have evidence that trans-inclusive policies have a negative impact on cisgender people at the community level, exclusions for trans people are likely to cause them harm and put them off being active,” the briefing said.
“Transgender people are already less likely to play sports than their cisgender peers. In addition to policy barriers, one main reason is that many transgender people do not feel safe or welcome in sport.”
Barbara Kendall, here at the 2004 Olympic Games, signed an open letter asking the Government to honour its coalition committment. Photo / Carlo Borlenghi
The briefing landed on Bishop’s desk days after he received an open letter from more than 50 former Olympians urging the Government to “prioritise fairness and safety”.
The signatures included those of gold medal winners Barbara Kendall and Joseph Sullivan, four-time Olympian Steven Ferguson, and former Silver Fern Anna Stanley (nee Rowberry).
Five more emails trickled into Bishop’s inbox following media stories about the open letter, all supporting it.
In October, Bishop told Sport NZ to rewrite the principles. It’s unclear how much his change of heart was influenced by the deluge of emails, the open letter, or Winston Peters (there was no correspondence from Peters in the OIA response, but that doesn’t mean they didn’t have phone calls or in-person chats).
Sport NZ has agreed with Bishop on a review process for the guidelines. It is due to be completed by May.
Derek Cheng is a senior journalist who started at the Herald in 2004. He has worked several stints in the press gallery team and is a former deputy political editor.
