Has Liz Truss said she won't make an announcement on GRA until September?

Link to the HoC briefing paper about Gender recognition and the rights of transgender people published last week. This was reissued today after being partially rewritten due to the inclusion of schools guidance which had been withdrawn.

researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-8969/CBP-8969.pdf

Thread from last week:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3969486-House-of-Commons-Library-Gender-recognition-and-the-rights-of-transgender-people-16-07-2020

The new version still includes links to the Cornwall schools transgender guidance which I understood was one of the documents which had been withdrawn.

So the leak to the Times was a kite flying exercise, to allow Boris/Cummings to gauge how hot the potato actually is.

Well yes, but they have been flying this fucking kite since January/February, and there have been reports that Liz Truss is frustrated with their reluctance to sort this out once and for all.

I'm with stumbledin, people underestimate the power of (male) networks. Pink News as a publication is a total joke, but read up about Pink News 'summer receptions' and see how they influence people.

On the bright side, a summer of barely any sport and sod all fun stuff to report on means the newspapers may have more time and space to cover the issues and related cases currently wending their way through the courts. 🤞

So the leak to the Times was a kite flying exercise, to allow Boris/Cummings to gauge how hot the potato actually is.

The answer presumably ....still too hot to handle.

Not a bad thing. Stonewall initially tried to get everything through on the quiet before people noticed. Instead people have noticed, opposition is growing and their reputation has been tarnished.

Well, what a letdown. Liz Truss said in the HoC that the results of the consultation will be published "in the summer" after all.

I'd say this is no time to let up on MPs then. I'm going to write to mine again (for the umpteenth time) and this time, it will be about the scientific finding that women rugby players are at increased risk of injury when they play against TW and ask specifically for her views on women's sport.

So theres basically no chance of a statement coming out on GRA now until September?

Is that because of the trans protests etc?

Teds - thanks.

And her definition of ‘discrimination’ no doubt includes removing sex based rights for the safety, privacy and dignity of women and girls. And ensuring factual observance and characterisation of sex can no longer be used for political, social and economic equality for women and girls.

Hopefully the turn out on the Conservatives side is a good sign???!!

Her question, No. 4 on the list, is "What steps the Government is taking to tackle discrimination against transgender people."

Marsha de Cordova has an immediate supplementary question (not specified but convention says it has to be a follow-up to NW's). MdC is attending virtually but NW will be physically present in the Chamber.

Liz Truss is answering both. However, as a poster in another thread pointed out, MdC is the shadow equalities minister, plus Kemi Badenoch (Conservative, Equalities Minister) and Caroline Nokes (Conservatives, Chair of the Women and Equalities Committee) will both be physically present in the HoC. That's quite a turn-out.

Teds - So Liz Truss will be answering the Nadia Whittome question (plus a supplementary from Marsha de Cordova) herself?

Do you know what the Q’s are?

Usual b### from NW I expect.

Some interesting late additions to the question call list for tomorrow’s Women and Equalities session.

So Liz Truss will be answering the Nadia Whittome question (plus a supplementary from Marsha de Cordova) herself? The other questions will largely be fielded by Kemi Badenoch and Victoria Atkins until Liz Truss stands up again to make a statement about her departmental responsibilities.

I'm hopeful. And nervous.

Good for Peru.
I would love to know who was responsible for putting it in there in the first place.
I cant help feeling if we know that maybe all this would make more sense?
But to be fair I am a bit overly attached to my tin foil hat?

catholic south america to name but one

Interestingly over a million people marched in the streets in Peru to get gender identity taken out of the curriculum.

cruxnow.com/global-church/2017/12/peru-withdraw-controversial-gender-ideology-curriculum/

I think the Tory MPs generally have woken up to the fact they were taken for a rid with the trans rights agends (thanks in no small part to all you wonderful women) and left to their own devises would give this whole thing the boot, transing kids and all/
I also dont think they are espicially afraid of stonewall et al.

I am very worried though about powerfull international players, whoever the f**k they are (no one seems to know )
The fact this agenda has taken off in every country around the world (even in the most unlikely ones, catholic south america to name but one, somewhere women are sent to jail for having a miscarriage are going down the self id route ffs) makes me think there are some VERY powerful players in this and I really dont see our gov standing up to international pressure right now when we are so vulnerable.

Some interesting late additions to the question call list for tomorrow’s Women and Equalities session.
publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5801/cmagenda/calllist200722v01.html

SnippyPants I can well imagine the to-ing and fro-ing. That’s why I said I felt mean picking fault about it. And gaining cross-party agreement on anything in this space is a massive achievement. The principles behind the petition are excellent. Anyway, I’ve already said my bit about the use of petitions.

I really appreciate the hours of individual hard work behind it, that there are women in six parties talking about these issues together is a very powerful step forward for women. I’m grateful to everyone making that happen.

Thanks for the correction on the EHRC enforcement role. I did look up enforcement at EHRC a while ago, because I couldn’t understand why in this area, so much seems to be reliant on being settled via tribunals, case law and JR when we have EHRC as a regulator for the EQA. I thought EHRC can’t be unaware but just seemed to be very relaxed about how women and children are being treated.

Obviously I got the wrong end of the stick because my impression was/is that EHRC didn’t really seem to enforce around GC issues where women and children are being disadvantaged, and in my memory that became ‘no powers’ but EHRC do have powers to enforce around EQA, as you rightly say. Hopefully with a new Chair they may get on the case(s) for the benefit of women and children.

The EHRC certainly Do have enforcement powers.

www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/our-powers/inquiries-investigations-and-wider-powers

Chatty the petition was published months ago as a rallying cry rather than as an attempt to change the law. It was designed to raise awareness more than anything and women from SIX political parties agreed on the wording! Can you imagine the toing and froing that took?
Each political pledge group has been working within their own parties on much more specific policy changes.

WU had every version of their Parliamentary petition refused by the Parliamentary team who make such decisions.

Much as I am a fan of the Baroness, the petition is not her work and nor has she claimed it to be so I'm not sure why people think it is. She just supports the general aims of women in those political groups.

the petition asks that government should Publish guidance explaining and enforcing the single sex exemptions in the Equality Act 2010’ That bit is already the job of the EHRC. Truss can just point to the fact it’s been done.

Sorry, I made an error there. ^ I don’t think EHRC have any enforcement powers in relation to EQA - I think EHRC only exist to produce guidance.

rusty I am GC and haven’t signed the petition. I want petitions to seek an actual tangible goal that only a petition could achieve because I feel like otherwise it’s just encouraging slacktivism. There isn’t much Liz Truss can do with that petition, other than just say, OK noted. I want more than that. I get it that it is a coalition backed petition but if the coalition can’t agree on basic political aims then I’m not sure that it’s a coalition that worth making. I know I sound harsh and I appreciate it’s women working out of goodwill in their own time to make this coalition happen so I feel mean saying that.

It’s interesting that the petition hasn’t gained a great deal of signatures. I posted about it on another thread, that I’m not sure about the aims on the petition.

They aren’t legally specific enough for what I would like to see, eg for changes to the GRA (amendment is needed on specific issues and then ideally repeal although we’d need to think about where that would leave existing GRC holders and I don’t know that policy-makers are thinking in depth about that) and I would support petitions with specific asks that would protect kids who are being offered physical transition at GIDs. Like greater CAMHS provision for all kids, but specific regulation over GIDS with doctors under specific licence.

There’s no ask in that petition for a select committee or public inquiry or any other kind of objective independent investigation into where we are with these issues at the moment, which would be an important starting point to get people on board.

Asks that are very non-specific in petitions are too easy to dodge; like demanding that: ‘data used to inform government policy is correctly recorded‘.
Do they mean data recorded by the government, or other data? Government policy is rightly informed by all sorts of data, coming from many sources. Government don’t have powers over how other orgs collect their data.

the petition asks that government should ‘Publish guidance explaining and enforcing the single sex exemptions in the Equality Act 2010’ That bit is already the job of the EHRC. Truss can just point to the fact it’s been done.
‘Ensure all new laws, amendments, and policies are assessed for their impact on 51% of the population, women and girls’.
We already have Equality Impact Assessments, is this different?

I really welcome the spirit of this petition of upholding sex-based rights, but I’m not sure that the petition is going to be able to achieve more concrete outcomes aside from signalling some selected elements of GC political feeling to Liz Truss. I think if it has an awareness-raising aim, it needed a broader set of resources behind it to introduce the issues and some figures to attach to it, and a petition isn’t necessarily the right vehicle for that. Sorry to be a downer about this.

I'm pinning my hopes on this for some enlightenment, which is scheduled in the HoC for tomorrow, after which Parliament goes into recess.

11.30 am*
Oral questions
Women and Equalities (including Topical Questions)

Nadia Whittome has a question diaried in about trans rights (but she centres trans people, not women and girls who want their rights to safe spaces preserved).

The statistics quoted in the Blunt/Pascoe article are misleading. The figure of less than 0.03% of under 18s being referred to gender identity services omits to say that this is the percentage each year. The true figure is around 0.5% of under 18s being referred.

stumbledin TBF I haven’t been out to a gay club in a few years but lobbying anyone on legal issues came a very long way down the list

Stonewall’s influence isn’t just about ‘male networks’ though, it’s about the fact they are a household name massive megacharity and yet have covertly abandoned the pivotal concept of same-sex rights in exchange for a nebulous gender identity umbrella. (It’s rubbish for keeping the rain off!)

That change is actively now working against same-sex people’s rights to assemble together, speak freely, have adult relationships with whoever they like, and so on - particularly for lesbians.

And yet to most people in politics or the general public who are not following all this, good old Stonewall are still good old Stonewall and everyone respects their role in upholding gay rights over the last 30 years+ and sees them as the go-to charity for Voice of the Gay and Lesbian Community because of that earned goodwill.

(It’s arguable whether Stonewall has ever centred lesbians’ interests equally to gay men but again, that’s not something that a lot of people without a connection to these issues might be aware of..)

Thanks for your patronising post stumbledin

Liz Truss has made no further comment since writing this letter.