Taking an overview, it does show how far we've been able to move the debate into the spotlight - from a position of near total obscurity just a matter of months ago.......
Yes, there was a question on 'trans rights'. All three candidats became sweaty and uncomfortable; squirming and avoiding direct questions. Lisa Nandy tried to shift her response on to areas with which she is more comfortable ( domestic violence/refuges/asylum seekers) - which she feels might take away some of the heat she clearly feels.
Kier Starmer was avoidant and non responsive; in fact actively blocked questions and refused to answer why he did not sign the 'pledge'. Krishnan Guru murthy did his best not to let them off the hook...but they wriggled free anyway.
Can't even remember what Long Bailey said: mechanical and lacking in anything worth listening to was my impression. She's hopeless as leadership material.
Gury murthy then asked a couple of audience members for their view. A fairly yong black woman said she thought that safe spaces for women were important, and a hijab wearing muslim woman wanted to know why Kier Starmer did not sign the pledge that the other two had done......no response......refusal to answer...and tried to make it look like he was just being comradely in his refusal.
It is clear that none of the candidates feel secure in what they are saying; and do not have a full grasp of the issues. And indeed, the audience seemed perplexed too: about what a 'trans woman' actually was or implied. Rebecca Long Bailey is the most mechanical and on-message.