Bridget Phillipson blocking EHRC guidance - thread 2

Reckon we get the guidance laid Today to bury it or Monday when the resignation speeches are on?

I think it would be hard to be in the NHS and not have an opinion but it would be the wise approach.

That's a possibility, certainly.

Would that be a belief in biology and facts by any chance, the very things which matter most in treating people correctly.

I think if you're in the NHS the best policy is not to have a GC opinion. Most Drs have been trained in being kind and trans identity

Encouraged by managers not to talk about it to whom?

The general public? In case the general public find out what the NHS is up to and don't like it?

Or, (sorry), she is a believer in trans ideology but didn't want to fall out with you about it?

This is a bit off topic, so I ask for forgiveness 🙏

Yesterday, my nephew called round with his girlfriend of seven years. They are both resident doctors in the NHS, struggling to take the next steps to specialisation. I had never met her before and really like her. She's articulate, grounded and a lovely person. When we were talking about the NHS, I asked how they were briefed as clinicians to deal with trans issues, making clear my negative feelings as a woman about terms like 'chest feeding'.

To my surprise, the girlfriend said they were encouraged not to talk about it and clamped her mouth shut. It was an odd moment in an afternoon of constant and easy conversation. I didn't press her, it being our first meeting, but I've been reflecting on it. Is something sinister going on? Or, more optimistically, has the NHS come to its senses and is taking steps to lower the temperature, to use a medical metaphor?

Hi
Annoyingly I can’t find the list at the moment, but it was all done through googling. I am at work so will look later.

Please explain more about this, with links. ( I am asking for genuine reasons.)

To no-one's great surprise, I imagine. Shows the level of capture in businesses today, though.

I think the correct spelling is Hand Maiden. What a waste of space (to put it kindly).
I like the idea of FoIs on the review process.

Well said, Tom!

Ex-Labour bod Tom Harris (who does a daily tweet to mark how many days of Phillipson's inaction we have had since the Supreme Court judgement) posted an interesting article that I thought would be of interest here:

https://tomharris2.substack.com/p/no-bridget-its-not-remotely-complex

"And here we are, with a government that claimsnthe question of separate men and women’s facilities is “complex”.

It’s really not. When Phillipson says “it’s complex”, what she really means is that there are too many Labour activists, trade union leaders and various party stakeholders who have drunk the gender ideological KoolAid and she dare not cross them. So instead she’s waiting, Micawber-like, for something to turn up, a deux ex machina that will relieve her, somehow, of the responsibilities of her current office....

The difference between this and previous Labour governments lies not in the scale of the task before them (though no one would want to be placed in the shoes of Attlee’s ministers, having to rebuild a nation after six years of war); it lies in the ambition and personal courage of ministers. Bevan took on the powerful medical establishment. Blair took on the employers and the devolution naysayers (mea culpa). They knew, or believed they knew, what was right and they were prepared to fight for it. They were even prepared to make enemies along the way. That’s politics. That’s what happens. That’s what it does.

We should at least be grateful that today’s cohort of ministers are facing less existential challenges than those that faced previous generations. If they can’t quite come to terms with the question, “What is a woman?”, we can hardly expect them to have succeeded in developing Britain’s independent nuclear deterrent or creating Nato."

Yes, that’s a fair point @Brainworm

I think the effectiveness of the film is dependent on viewers knowing the detail and without providing context (e.g single sex provision must be based on biological sex) it’s only going to speak to those who are already all over the detail.

This made up equivalence seeks to explain my thinking:

Last September the Supreme Court made an important ruling about the rights of Catholics. The EHRC produced interim guidance about how to uphold this law. The GLP challenged the guidance but their claims were rejected and the interim guidance was ruled to be legal. You must follow the SC ruling and seek legal advice if uncertain. Go to our website for more information.

The above would be a lot more useful if it included some headlines about the rights the SC ruled on (e.g. not being forced to work on Ash Wednesday). Without this, the reader needs to know what issues were contested and subsequently rejected.

Yes, I thought it was pretty clear, not sure what I’m missing.

It does. It clarifies the fact that the GLP intervention was rejected completely. It also is clear that the EHRC does not make law, it simply helps to implement the law, and that relevent bodies now also need to implement the law.

Thank you! Very interesting.

This was a good listen. Amongst other things, Akua Reindorf discusses the failure of BP to lay the code of practice behind parliament and what her motivations might be:

I thought he was suggesting that the video was a weak or ineffective intervention - impotent.

Stevenson doesn’t say anything of any substance about the law beyond the generic fact that the law must be followed, read their fact sheet and legal advice sought if in doubt. Nothing in this intervention (short film) clarifies anything.

Those who are convinced that they are correct in their position will assume she is speaking to those who have actually got it wrong, not them.

Freudian slip by Michael Foran!
(spotted by Venice Allan)

https://x.com/i/status/2029956529886044191

Mary-Ann Stephenson..

https://x.com/i/status/2029945096817496087