The Scottish Conservatives have accused ministers of “moral cowardice” after their calls for a statement on public sector workers’ access to single-sex spaces were rejected at Holyrood.

The Tories called for the Scottish government to provide clarity on the issue amid an ongoing employment tribunal.

NHS Fife nurse Sandie Peggie is challenging the health board after she was suspended following a complaint about sharing a changing room with a transgender colleague.

Parliamentary business minister Jamie Hepburn cited a lack of time, short notice, and the live legal proceedings as the reasons why the government would not provide a statement to parliament.

The government later issued a statement saying it supports provisions under the Equality Act 2010 which allow for trans people to be excluded from some spaces when its it a “proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim”.

Ms Peggie claims she was subjected to unlawful harassment by being made to share a changing room at Victoria Hospital, Kirkcaldy, with Dr Beth Upton – who is a transgender woman.

Her claim is disputed by the health board and the doctor. Following hearings last week, the tribunal has been adjourned until July.

The Scottish Conservatives submitted requests for topical, urgent and first minister’s questions on the issue of single-sex spaces in the public sector.

However, these were all rejected by the presiding officer Alison Johnstone, who ended up in a heated exchange with Conservative MSP Douglas Ross over the matter. Only a limited number of questions are selected each week.

The Tories attempted to amend the parliamentary schedule to include a statement from the government, but this was voted down by MSPs.

Tabling the amendment, Conservative MSP Tess White said: “The situation that has arisen in NHS Fife speaks volumes about what is happening behind closed doors in Scotland’s public sector under this SNP government.”

She added: “Women are watching today. The public have had enough of the recent abdication, obfuscation and moral cowardice from this government.”

Hepburn insisted the government was not “afraid of being held to account by the chamber” but said there was already a “busy” parliamentary schedule.

He also said there was an “inherent danger” of breaking “sub judice” rules, which prevent MSPs from speaking about active legal proceedings without the permission of the presiding officer.

“That would not be fair to any party taking part” in the employment tribunal, Hepburn said.

Conservative MSP Murdo Fraser pointed out that the NHS Fife tribunal was not a criminal case, where a jury could be swayed by comments in parliament. He said a ministerial statement would pose no “risk of prejudice”.

Hepburn called Fraser’s point “nonsense”, saying that sub judice rules also applied to civil cases. “It’s a live case,” he told MSPs. “And we need to be careful what we say.”

He added that the amendment was tabled “beyond the 11th hour”. “It’s not good enough to come to ask ministers to make a statement the same day,” Hepburn said.

A Scottish government spokesperson later said ministers expect “all relevant organisations to comply with the requirements of the Equality Act 2010”.

They added: “As employers, organisations may need to consider the impact of other legislation, such as the requirements of the law on health and safety in workplaces.

“The Scottish government supports the separate and single sex exceptions in the Equality Act 2010, which can allow for trans people to be excluded when this is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.”

After the amendment was voted down, Ross made a point of order to ask the presiding officer for guidance on how Conservative MSPs could ask a question about access to single-sex spaces in the public sector.

He acknowledged it was “frowned upon” for MSPs to challenge the decisions of the presiding officer, but called for clarity over the issue.

He said it was “not right” that all Scottish health boards might have to wait until the tribunal reconvenes in July “before they get the answers from government ministers in this parliament”.

Johnstone replied: “In line with long-standing convention and in common with my predecessors I do not give reasons for selection decisions.

“I consider each question lodged carefully and in line with published criteria. There are many important questions submitted each week.”

In a heated exchange, she said she did not expect challenges to her “authority”, adding that members had opportunities throughout the week to raise the issue.

After Ross repeatedly shouted out “when” from his seat, Johnstone rebuked him.

“You are an experienced member of this parliament and I am sure you are wholly aware of the opportunities that are available to you,” she said.

Ross then raised another point of order, asked the presiding officer what opportunities he would have to raise the issue as she had “refused” his party’s previous requests for questions in the chamber.

She replied: “I have explained the situation quite clearly. I am not sitting here explaining matters that you understand wholly thoroughly.”