EHRC cuts ties with Stonewall.

If the previous relationship between EHRC & Stonewall was purely for internal use, why didn't EHRC look at the materials with their ‘external eyes’ and spot the huge discrepancies with the laws they were responsible for upholding?

It's totally absurd to suggest that EHRC could run the two perspectives in parallel. As employers they were just as responsible for adhering to the laws themselves, not just for making by other employers keep to them.

I'm glad they're off the scheme, but I call bullshit on that statement. To echo another poster, I don't like how they've withdrawn quietly. I'd have more respect for them if they announced they were withdrawing due to a conflict of interest, instead of blaming it on budgets.

Hmm. That's a point. Maybe a FOI request to detail all the other memberships they've ended - I wonder if there are any more than Stonewall?..

This is extremely encouraging news. Budget cuts are the best place to get rid of stuff that doesn’t deliver any value

I am actually happy with the way that they’ve chosen to play it, because, like tibtom upthread, I think that (infuriating as it is), we have to leave a path for people to walk back from their extreme positions. I WANT to say “ha! I told you so!” and have people held to account, but that won’t move us on to actually making sure women’s rights are maintained, because that will end up looking like an extremist position too (it isn’t, of course). I draw the line when it comes to activists who have been responsible for abuse, threats, harming vulnerable people, trying to get people sacked and so on, though. The well of forgiveness runs quite dry, there.

So I’m happy to say “That’s great, EHRC, good decision. Now, moving on, let’s carry on talking about what we do when protected characteristics clash”.

Well played, Baroness Falkner. Interested to see what she does next.

This is excellent. Hopefully many many other orgs will look at their membership of Stonewall in the light of the budgetary constraints which surely must be severe throughout the public sector.

This has huge implications for the Welsh Government, in particular, which just outsources all matters LGB and T to Stonewall Cymru and has completely refused to meet with women's and LGB groups questioning what's going on. According to my Welsh friends, there's evidence that ministers and members aren't getting to see the reports and letters that have been sent. They are being filtered out and binned by all the woke young SPADs who've been trained up by Stonewall. This is Stonewall Democracy in action.

I know friends in the Labour Party in Wales have been trying to get the party and the government to wake up to the fact that they're in bed with a bad 'un, but they won't listen to women. When the shit hits the fan, the Welsh Assembly is going to be covered from head to foot.

I hope now the EHRC has dropped them, everyone else will feel free to do likewise. It's been a protection racket and this is their way out. Allison Bailey's case has really shaken things up. Thank you, Allison. If Stonewall folds before the case what would happen?

The growing pushback will give us something to raise with organisations. I am still waiting for a response from a government department on misstated equalities legislation. I am going to follow up with this, the intervention in the MF case and the Uni of Essex report.

This is long overdue and extremely welcome. That an organisation responsible for the enforcement of equality laws should have hooked up for so long with a lobbying group deliberately misinterpreting the law - to press its own agenda - needs an investigation in and of itself. It shows the extent of institutional capture by Stonewall, I hope in particular the government agencies and public bodies paying hundreds of thousands of pounds to an organisation with undue influence over public life act quickly to disentangle themselves also.

Good. Now the rest. The card house is staring to wobble...

EHRC, University of Essex. Please, please let this be the tide finally turning.

I do think on the whole we have to make it easy for people to change their minds. But EHRC should be honest about the influence of Stonewall - including on the impact of their own employees of following illegal advice and promoting a scheme that promotes just one protected characteristic at the expense of others. EHRC should be doing more than just pulling out - they should be highlighting the dangers amd illegality of whay Stonewall promote.

at FannyCann Isn't it tempting to want vengeance - especially looking back at the terrible cost to women and children that has happened via Stonewall.

Of course, if the EHRC did make reference to the illegality of advice, not just as represented in the Essex report but seen in the illegal removal of sex based rights across the country, the compensation floodgates will open.

Now to prise them (and the other biased groups) away from the judiciary and police. While we've got them gaslighting judges into believing self ID is the law and and that adult human female is hate speech, we're all still under threat.

I do feel this will come to an end, and soon. But most women will never really know just how close we all came to loosing so much. It will go out like it came in, by the back door, sneaking off quietly hoping no-one will notice and the main players will never be held to account.

The likes of Daniel Radcliffe and Emily Watson, Eddie redmayne, all those comedians and broadcasters and writers, they will never be called on to apologise or even examine what they said and why it was so harmful..... It will just fade away, because thankfully the worst will never happen.

I agree. But the annoying thing about fade away is people still won't understand!

I suppose I'm wanting a signed confession and admission of guilt and even that won't be enough if they don't believe it. I probably had a part in the Spanish Inquisition in a former life.

This is good news, even if EHRC have tried to keep it quiet and downplay the significance.

Agreed. They have to present it that way, but it is a major shift. Stonewall can no longer points to the body that is supposed to monitor equalities legislation being a member.

Hopefully, equality law will start to be applied by reference to the law, not by what Stonewall says it is, and it with due reference to all protected characteristics, including the frequently-overlooked “sex”. It’s not much to ask, really.

There are organisations, like Allison Bailey's chambers, that are clearly corrupted by the relationship
Add to that any organisation that immediately ran to Stonewall to be told how to respond to the FOI about their relationship and involvement with Stonewall.

This is good news, even if EHRC have tried to keep it quiet and downplay the significance.

Well, they are hardly going to say "yes, this may have had an influence on our work" voluntarily, are they? The most you could reasonably expect is something about a public impression of lack of impartiality.

There are organisations, like Allison Bailey's chambers, that are clearly corrupted by the relationship. I don't think we have firm evidence for that with EHRC.

From the daily mail article

Few would dispute the hard-won freedom of gay, lesbian and bisexual people to live, love and marry without stigma or discrimination. But as the LGB Alliance’s rising membership shows, plenty of LGB people themselves don’t agree that this should mean having to pretend someone with a penis and testicles can ever be a ‘lesbian’.

Seriously Stonewall, what on earth were you thinking?

Regarding our membership of the Stonewall Diversity Champions scheme, to suggest that this impacts on our impartiality is wholly inaccurate and unfounded. The programme is for employers and our membership always related exclusively to our internal affairs, it had no influence on any external work.

However, as a publicly funded organisation we have to ensure that we are making the best choices when it comes to our budget and have recently been reviewing all of our memberships.

We wrote to Stonewall in March to let them know that we would not be renewing our membership, and this has now expired.

Hahaha whatever EHRC. Run away run away run away.

In the Mail .. www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-9608277/MARY-HARRINGTON-group-fighting-homophobia-clashes-gay-rights-champion-theres-issue.html

''The programme is for employers and our membership always related
exclusively to our internal affairs, it had no influence on any external work.''

But looking at the way women have managed to successfully challenge some of the statements on their website, I don't have confidence in that.
It seems obvious to me that if you create a culture in the workplace, its going to affect the people you recruit and the way your staff do their job.

I really REALLY hope this is good news.

I necver get this 'just about employees' thing? Who do they think draws up guidance etc if not employees who have been indoctrinated in Stonewall?

March! This happened a couple of months ago.

In case you cant see the link, it says;

''22nd May 2021
In a letter to the campaigning group “Sex Matters”, the Chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, Baroness Kishwer Falkner has disclosed that the equalities watchdog, has quit the Stonewall Diversity Champions Scheme. ''

There is also a link to the letter;
''Regarding our membership of the Stonewall Diversity Champions scheme, to suggest that this impacts on our impartiality is wholly inaccurate and unfounded.
The programme is for employers and our membership always related
exclusively to our internal affairs, it had no influence on any external work.
However, as a publicly funded organisation we have to ensure that we are making the best choices when it comes to our budget and have recently been reviewing all of our memberships.
We wrote to Stonewall in March to let them know that we would not be renewing our membership, and this has now expired.''
sex-matters.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/20210518-EHRC-Chair-to-Sex-Matters.pdf