Emails to Liz Truss and the response of the Government Equalities Office

The reason I felt assured, (I should have said) was that they follow the law, entirely. That's what we want isn't it. I want the GRA repealed but until and unless that happens, the best I can hope for is that the process is governed by legal imperatives and not emotional ones.

The are responsible for upholding the law during the process. The rest is down to other people/organisations

[quote gardenbird48]Sorry I can’t find the the longer more recent thread about the call for evidence re GRA reform and the responses which seem to be taking forever but this thread looked quite good anyway.

Bizarrely they have also included a response that was clearly intended for the toilets call for evidence which is still open.

There are some absolute shockers - the RCN is keen to throw women under the bus and the GMB.

This one was interesting though - it is from the Judge who preside over the GRC panel and describes the process in detail.
committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/19562/pdf/[/quote]
Does anyone have the link to the toilets call for evidence?? I am enraged by Biden and fancy letting it out with a letter-writing, evidence-giving spree...

This bit is not very reassuring:

”I am a co-author of the Judicial College’s Equal Treatment Bench Book (ETBB) and a member of its editorial panel. I sit on the Diversity Steering Committee of the Judges’ Council and I am a member of the Diversity Task Force”

The ETBB is responsible for the fact that if a rapist decides he is a woman then the court will require the victim to refer to the rapist as “she” and “her” on pain of being found in contempt of court.

Maria MacLachlan was required by the judge to use female pronouns when referring to the person who physically assaulted her. She complied but the judge decided she had done so with poor grace and docked her compensation accordingly.

”He (the judge) called my inability to comply with the request to pretend that my violent male assailant is a woman “bad grace”; he called the fact that, several weeks after the assault and prior to Wolf being arrested, I had tweeted an unkind joke about him, “foolish”. Apparently, I should have just put up and shut up and never mentioned him again. These, as far as I recall, were the factors he used to find me guilty of being too uppity to compensate.”

Continued at:

“The ostensible trial of Tara Wolf – Part 2”
www.peaktrans.org/blog-the-ostensible-trial-of-tara-wolf-part-2/

The ETBB also requires everyone else involved in the case, including the judge, to use female pronouns.

Newspaper reports of court cases have to accurately report the actual proceedings. It is the ETBB that leads to articles that are (apparently) about female rapists.

thanks Fleegle - my search skills are a bit rubbish.

Uppity here it is. Support of self-id, tbf it is not worse than some of them but my mil was a nurse and I know a number of nurses and they would be horrified by this and I expected a little bit more of a sensible approach from the RCN. I wonder if they asked their members for their views?

2.3 The Fair Care for Trans and non-binary patients aims to support nursing staff to maintain strong patient-centred approaches that place the rights, preferences and voices of trans and non-binary staff at the heart of care and health policy-making. it would be nice if women could get a little look in, although if they are only referring to trans policies I could have given that point the benefit of the doubt, but....

4. Recommendations
4.1 The RCN expects that the Inquiry will identify the steps that will need to be taken by a wide range of organisations to swiftly improve the opportunities that trans people have to self-define their gender identity.

committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/18117/pdf/

Can anyone help me locate the RCN response?

Stonewall Champion.

Here's the thread gardenbird

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4100396-GRA-reform?pg=1

The Judge's submission did concern me; she admitted their training was done only by 'trans' people, including Stephen Whittle.

It seems to me, training for ALL judges, whatever their role, should involve a damn sight more ordinary women, who are often on the receiving end of their appalling decisions.

I found the Judges submission very reassuring gardenbird

I meant to say they’ve put a fresh batch of responses up but mine still isn’t on it

Sorry I can’t find the the longer more recent thread about the call for evidence re GRA reform and the responses which seem to be taking forever but this thread looked quite good anyway.

Bizarrely they have also included a response that was clearly intended for the toilets call for evidence which is still open.

There are some absolute shockers - the RCN is keen to throw women under the bus and the GMB.

This one was interesting though - it is from the Judge who preside over the GRC panel and describes the process in detail.
committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/19562/pdf/

Thanks Snippy- very good points!

Good luck with your MP today, MrsSnippyPants !

MrsSnippy

What specific aspect are you going to focus on when you see your MP?

MrsSnippy You asked how many MPs are on our side - mine definitely is. I had a thread (over a year ago now!) which detailed some of his response to my letter re self id.

Very right wing Conservative, church going, one of the safest seats in the country. We're very rural. If people knew about it, self id would not be a vote winner here.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3390955-my-mp-thinks-self-id-is-ridiculous

My Tory MP understands the issues and I got an email back from her a couple of years ago when I contacted her to express my concern about this when they started proposing GRA reform.

So I’m not sure whether it is pointless to email her again when I know she is against making it easier for predatory males to enter women’s spaces. I’m sure she’ll vote against anyway. But maybe it would be good to remind her how lots of people feel about this? What do you think?

Oh and in answer to your question. Three months.

Perhaps something that those writing to potentially sympathetic Tory MPs could point out. It might be a standard line that Penny Mordaunt, following advice from Stonewall or equivalent, approved, but which should be reviewed.

Wasn't it in the Harry judgement where it was pointed out that the Equalities Act was badly drafted, or was that something out. In any case I suspect many may regret what they wished for, as post Brexit, many Tories may be inclined to review the whole arena of EU imposed human rights, equalities, and employment legislation. A sort of bonfire of the protections.

In fairness, the holding replies might link with the recent reshuffle.

Civil Servants will recognise that there is possibly a change in policy direction so waiting for a steer. Post election Minister was waiting to see what happened in the reshuffle. New Minister may still be reading in, and aware that this is something that No 10 and Cabinet may want to consider. Cabinet are buried in budget and Brexit. Plus possibly wanting to see how the current debate within the Labour party plays out. Wider criticism of Labours very forward pro-trans position, will make it easier for the Tories to take a step or two back from their current stance.

So Civil Servants can't write their policy submission till they have a steer on their Minister's thinking. Minister knows that this is a potential hot potato so won't give a steer till they have No 10 clearance. No 10 see it as a difficult and evolving subject, with no need for early action, other than bits of tidying up following Court rulings. (The Harry case and probably the GIDS one, if it goes the right way.)

In the meantime, waffly responses. Which does not mean they are not being read and noted. Indeed, given the Minister is probably actively thinking about the way forward, probably a perfect time for them to receive lots of correspondence, both public and MP.