House of Lords Gender Recognition Act GRA - video - 19 Oct 2020

Lord Cashman, or as I like to call him Barry from Eastenders, should keep his beak out of educational guidance.

no id put them firmly as first order bigoteers because all of those people know exactly what is going on, they just handwave away any attempt at talking about it as transpobic bigotry

it is a brilliant example of bigoteering in action!

Cashman has deliberately misprepresented the Baroness and got his celebrity follwers like Ian Mckellan tweeting in support.

Meanwhile Helen Joyce has tracked down the tweet where Cashamn insisted Stonewall were not and had not tried to remove sex as a protected characteristic and even when provided wth the evidence from Stonewall's own website, refused to back down

seen on twitter - the Lib Dems have taken £1.3m + from a pharmaceutical company over the last 10 years - I wonder what they could want in return

I love the idea that ordinary women must be getting money from somewhere if their opinion doesn't align with certain members of the House of Lords hmm
Sounds like projection to me.

Especially when you consider that their side has funding from many major blue chip companies, pharmaceutical/medical companies (via Arcus), our own government - many railway companies, police forces etc etc. If anyone wants to mutter about funding I think it should be us women's rights peeps. It would be interesting to have that all laid out in one go - a multi-million £ industry?? It would make our reported £600k look rather puny.

I love the idea that ordinary women must be getting money from somewhere if their opinion doesn't align with certain members of the House of Lords
Sounds like projection to me.

You need to donate quickly to Ann Sinnott's crowdfunder if you're going to.
It finishes very soon and still needs to get to its target.

Given the comparable difficulty in defining gender if it relies solely on self-identity, will the Government commit to advising the NHS on the specific rights of women who do not have male bodies to access single-sex wards and medical facilities?

Well, cheers for that Lord Triesman. People formerly known as women are "women who do not have male bodies". Was he being mischievous? Either way it shows where we are today thanks to the GRA.

I've just watched this - thank you for the link. Well, on one side we have sensible questions re. EA 2010, single sex exemptions, conflict in guidance on sports and on the other we have dark insinuations about funding sources, Cashman's blah blah and another question from (I think) Barker that I really didn't understand but sounded unpleasant.

Is that really the best they have?

Burnham also has form.

This is not a left/right issue and that is made very clear by this debate.

So up yours Baroness Barker, you know where you can stick your nasty assertions.

When the "Abolishing Mixed Sex Wards" Policy was introduced in 2010 by the Health Secretary Andrew Lansley, it was heralded with:
"It should be more than an expectation, it should be a requirement that patients who are admitted should be admitted to single-sex accommodation”
Andrew Lansley said “Patients should not suffer the indignity of being cared for in mixed-sex accommodation."
Except.

Whilst the public were told by the Government that wards would be segregated by SEX, the NHS Information Standards Team were told to segregate wards by self-declared GENDER. Privately. Without telling people.

From Barraker's thread.

We need to keep the pressure on for new legislative guidance. Ann Sinnott's JR is extremely important.

I know where my tenner is going.

Three cheers for Lord Triesman (Lab)

Berridge: My Lords, as I have outlined, the NHS, as a public body, knows that it is the Equality Act that outlines its provision of services, and so single-sex wards can be provided. There is specific NHS guidance that, at present, states that transgender people should be accommodated according to their presentation but that decisions need to be made in the best interests of patients. We leave it to front-line clinicians, who are aware of the circumstances on their wards and in their hospitals, to make those decisions. (my bolds, obvs.)

The message I take from this is that any judicial review must be requested against NHS bodies and not against central government. Fair enough. Was the single sex wards issue Andy Burnham's fault or am I misremembering?

We are now focusing on digitising and streamlining the process, and reducing the fee. We hope these changes will make the process less bureaucratic for transgender people. At this stage, we are not proposing further legislative guidance, but we will keep this under review.

We need to keep the pressure on for new legislative guidance. Ann Sinnott's JR is extremely important.

Three cheers for Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Lab)

The Hansard record is not accurate for Baroness Berridge's response.

Hansard: Yes, the Equality Act has an exemption, so that single-sex spaces can be provided and, where justified, somebody can be refused access to that space.

What I heard her say: Yes indeed, the Equality Act has an exemption so that single sex spaces can be provided and actually, where it is justified, someone can be refused access - where it is justified to that space.

She strongly emphasised that the single sex exceptions are to be justified for the space and not for the individual trans person who would like access. This helps dispel any lingering confusion about 'case by case' caused by EHRC guidance. The fact that there is still so much lingering confusion shows that we need new statutory guidance that accurately reflects the law.

Transcript:

hansard.parliament.uk/lords/2020-10-19/debates/62AF3412-0E8B-41DE-9A89-132F5958651E/GenderRecognitionAct2004

Yes, there are a lot of people who have a massive problem with people (mainly women) taking legal action, isn't there? You can see the donations on the crowdfunding page and add it all up ffs, not hard.

The Ann Sinnott crowd funder ruffled some feathers. People 'felt sick' at how quickly it raised money. Why? She's asking for the law to be correctly and clearly stated-what's worrying or sickening about that?