Why did Speaker John Bercow refuse to let MPs debate the state-sponsored abuse of women?

[TimeForDebate]

‘Why did John Bercow refuse to let MPs debate the state-sponsored abuse of women?

I have no idea and his office told me they never give a reason for the rejection of a UQ.

He is, of course, meant to be a wholly neutral figure who discharges his duties as Speaker even-handedly and without bias to any cause or campaign. I have no reason to think he did otherwise on this occasion.

However, it is at least worth noting that John Bercow is also the President of the Kaleidoscope Trust, an advocacy organisation that describes its mission thus: ‘We urge the British government and Commonwealth stakeholders to use their influence in support of the rights of LGBT people.’

James Kirkup

Full article here:

blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/09/the-state-has-failed-karen-whites-victims/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

Just noticed thread on this down the board ! No need to comment here then - please continue posting on earlier post. Can't find delete button ...

James Kirkup asks:

Was this just a catastrophic failure of judgement? Was it the result of flawed policy on the handling of transgender inmates? Did a climate of unthinking acquiescence to the demands of a highly effective transgender rights lobby contribute to this horrible mistake?

Here is your answer from the daily mail:

Yet hidden away in the Ministry of Justice's latest prisons policy, PSI 17-2016, is a line that, disturbingly, suggests the same decision could be made again in future.

'Women offenders who present a high risk of harm to other women are managed safely in the female estate.

'Transgender women who present similar risks should be managed in a similar way in the female estate."

Wilfully ignoring the fact that sexual violence is committed by men, 98% of the time.

The common denominator for perpetrators of sexually violent crime is that they are men.

Sexual violence is a sex specific crime.

Men who know this full well, are pretending it isn't. Other men are agreeing or ignorant. And yet more men are scared of those men.

Cowardice, misogyny, arrogance.

Take your pick.

Oh I missed it too !

Is there any value in writing to the minister for prisons regarding this? Or is it a case of he signed off on the policy and therefore is unlikely to reverse it?

Just wondering as a member of his constituency?

Ministry of Justice, please can you provide me with evidence of 'similar risks' presented by dangerous female prisoners including rape and sexual harassment with an intact and functioning penis? How many are there exactly?

The last figures I saw had the number of female category A prisoners at 7. But over 1000 category A male prisoners. Any thoughts on why and whether this difference is possibly relevant at all?

Is the issue simpl put that the riskassessment process makes it impossible to allow the offending risk of males to be included in consideration of those prisoners who identify as transwomen?

They are therefore considered only in the contexts of being a)transgender and b)women.

To be blunt, a climate of fear where no one is accountable.

Everyone knows a Male in a female jail is a risk. Everyone. No one who works in prisons or has any experience of prisons, prisoners, or offending could have any doubt of this.

To sign off on putting them there implies that their professional judgement is compromised by pressure to appear politically correct, that there’s no mechanism to voice dissent and crucially that no one is held responsible for the consequences.

Inquiry. Now. Someone signed off on this and they’re either an active willing danger to female prisoners or operating in a system that is forcing decisions that are an active danger to female prisoners and children.

And shame on you, John Bercow for blocking the urgent question in parliament. Shame. On. You.

The last figures I saw had the number of female category A prisoners at 7.

I don't know the exact figure so can anyone who knows them check this for me? There are around 150 transwomen in prison (this is the figure I'm most uncertain of) and about 48% of them are category A?

Which means that there are 10 times as many category A transwomen as there are category A natal women - despite transwomen being about 0.6% of the population at large?

Aspie - I don't have the exact figures to hand but yes, there are only about a dozen highest category risk women prisoners at any one time (they call them "restricted status", which is analagous to the male "category A").

The figure for TW of 150 is about right. But the 48% refers to Category A and sex offenders combined. Not all sex offenders are Category A. They tend to put these two in the same prisons because of segregation facilities - sex offenders may need protection from other inmates; Category A prisoners may pose risk to other inmates.