Change in focus in equality policy...

I don't trust the Torys at all and I don't think undermining unconscious bias awareness and indirect discrimination is a good thing.
I think this is a backlash against the progress disadvantaged groups have made, namely women and people of non-white British heritage.
It means we can wrangle about data and what it means, rather than deal with discrimination.
Invisible Women shows that we don't collect data on how women are disadvantaged. So how are we going to tackle systematic sexism under this regime? I feel this could be a trojan horse deployed on GC feminists.....

Highly interested that she makes a point of quoting three PCs: sex, race and gender reassignment.

Given the deliberate conflation of the first and last by Stonewall et al, it seems significant.

I mentioned this on a separate thread, but I think it's canny messaging designed to put clear blue water between the Tories and Labour on identity politics which doesn't play well with the average constituent in the Blue Wall seats where they're looking to entrench support. Labour aren't going to win the next election if they can't regain Bolsover. This is 'no nonsense', 'common sense', saying what everyone's really thinking messaging. No more talking shops and distractions - we're going to roll our sleeves up and get down to business. Whether you think they'll improve social mobility or not with this approach, I think she's reading the room. Maybe also positioning herself as future leader material. There was a V positive article about Truss in the Independent about how she's the unsung hero of Brexit trade deals this week.

Why have the examples of unintended consequences (single sex spaces, Rotherham etc) been left out of the official transcript?
which states on the page "Delivered on:
17 December 2020 (Transcript of the speech, exactly as it was delivered)"

www.gov.uk/government/speeches/fight-for-fairness

JK Rowling recently quoted JK Galbraith to the effect that real leadership involves directly addressing the major fears and concerns of those you want to lead. Truss seems to be building herself a profile and position on the less feral side of the Tory party by doing just that. Lots of good stuff in that speech, and it's really good to see the BS confronted.

She damned Foucault by name! Yay!

That said, she remains a Tory, and I don't think we can expect her to go all centre left on this. However, if it looks like the Tories could actually benefit from this explicit rejection of identity politics, it could strengthen Starmer's hand. Now that the Lib Dems have gone off skipping hand in hand through their bizarre alternate realities, we really are back with two parties only.

Yes as a general rule (smaller state, more pulling yourself up by your own bootstraps sort of thing, lower taxes) compared to Labour ( bigger state, more government intervention as a positive thing, higher taxes)
but I would also think the Conservatives in the U.K. are actually to the left of the US democrats on many things - supporting state provided healthcare the obvious example. Imo Boris is a liberal really and no politicians here of any persuasion do God

(In the US context there would be the additional “god ordained it thusly” component which I understand you Brits thankfully do not engage in”)

I don’t know the UK political climate as well as the US but isn’t the Conservative party the party of austerity/small government in comparison to the others? Can they really claim with any kind of believability that they are going to put forth policy that really addresses poverty in a meaningful way?

If a republican in the US started talking about “individual choice” in the realm of economic equality I would know what they really mean is “I’m rich because I chose to be, you’re poor because you chose to be, so nothing needs doing”.

There's a lot about what they won't do, and very little about what they will do to address inequality in that speech.

I reckon Truss realised the situation when she received bucket loads of mail from women all over the country.

I am hopeful about this. Ordinary people of all colours and creeds are just sick of the endless wokery and identitarism.

The narrative of privilege has caused great upset in some mixed race families I know: people feel as though their deep love and care for their children and grandchildren has been attacked, and such attacks have been tacitly supported by the establishment.

It's all so destructive. It's a war against most people's good natures.

I know many of you don't like/trust the Conservatives, but it might be worth reflecting on the deep shit we would now be in if the Labour Party under Corbyn had won the election this time last year.

She was top, not too

Liz Truss is riding high in the conservative members polls right now. I saw a recent one where she was too with a score of + 75!
By contrast Boris was about + 3.
Not sure if it is this brief or more likely the trade stuff but either way she is a very popular minister right now amongst the Tories. Maybe this is a case of strike while the iron is hot?

Wow

I'm rather shocked but on balance I'm in agreement. There's still a lot of details to discuss but at least no one is shouting no debate in your face.

In addition, this focus on groups at the expense of individuals has led to harmful unintended consequences. It has led to the Left turning a blind eye to practices that undermine equality, whether it be failing to defend single-sex spaces, hard fought for by generations of women… enabling and tolerating antisemitism … or the appalling grooming of young girls in towns like Rotherham.

Study after study has shown that unconscious bias training does not improve equality, and in fact can backfire by reinforcing stereotypes and exacerbating biases. That’s why this week we announced we will no longer be using it in government or civil service.

Whether it’s “affirmative action” … forced training on “unconscious bias” … or lectures on “lived experience” … the Left are in thrall to ideas that undermine equality at every turn.

This school of thought says that if you are not from an ‘oppressed group’ then you are not entitled to an opinion … and that this debate is not for you. I wholeheartedly reject this approach.

I am calling time on “pink bus” feminism, where women are left to fix sexism and campaign for childcare.

we need the equality debate to be led by facts … not by fashion. Time and time again, we see politicians making their own evidence-free judgements.

…….. I think she's nailed all of this, and there's little to disagree with.

We will not limit our fight for fairness to the nine protected characteristics laid out in the 2010 Equality Act … which include sex, race, and gender reassignment. While it is true people in these groups suffer discrimination, the focus on protected characteristics has led to a narrowing of the equality debate that overlooks socio-economic status and geographic inequality...….In addition to race, sex, disability and religion, (this project) will also look at issues around geography, community and socio-economic background..

In addition to.

It's well worth watching the speech itself.
Really puts the boot in, where the boot was needed.

Thanks Red.

"It has led to the Left turning a blind eye to practices that undermine equality, whether it be failing to defend single-sex spaces, hard fought for by generations of women… enabling and tolerating antisemitism … or the appalling grooming of young girls in towns like Rotherham."

There's going to be some tantrums over that, I bet...

And I can see by this point that the govt are really, really fed up with gender identitarianism and with women being really pissed off with them about it. I'm sure they'd like it all to just go away.

The problem is that if they think this is an easier third way than growing a backbone and setting down boundaries, and being prepared to withstand the tantrums, they're wrong. That boundary will be pushed for until it's found, and as they've already discovered, the longer they leave it, the bigger the mess gets that they will have to eventually face up to.

The Equalities Act was the hoovering up of lots of bits of legislation and tying it together with equality duties etc. I could see an argument for saying to release it back into its separate legislations: for example going back to the disability discrimination act, but losing that centralised system. The protections in there are tied in to a lot of other bits of legislation which would not go away: there are a LOT of things they would have to re draft from scratch if they did this, and to me that makes it unlikely. Likewise many other bits associated with each protected characteristic. I could see an argument that stuffing all those bits into the one bucket has not gone anywhere useful on reflection, and they did better in their separate legislations.

Will also be interesting to see how far Liz Truss gets with undoing the woke thinking within the Civil Service.

I started a thread about the consultation on home abortions (which nobody read!) but also pointed out that in the briefing for this consultation they state that it is about "people" who get pregnant!!!!!!!!!
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4107152-Home-use-of-both-pills-for-early-medical-abortion-up-to-10-weeks-gestation-Government-Consultation

I dont think there is any suggestion of doing away with the EA just saying that those who try and make equality only a tick box exercise about the (current) protected characteristics.

And whilst I can see how tempting it would be to think that doing away with "shouty groups" if that meant Stonewall and Mermaids, need to be aware they could equally be WPUK and others.

Not sure why someone up thread thought anyone was saying this would be better for women.

Just that in fact the issue of finding equality for women is not just about the impact of trans rights on women's rights, is also about making sure women have the same rights in all areas that men do.

But I think for the Tories this means the tired old them that those who try hard will always suceed.

Not sure who did their training but of all places, particularly the HoC people need to be made aware that their experience of the world is not THE experience of the world for the vast majority of people.

As the always used to say "never trust a tory", but the problem is who can you trust.