What exactly IS happening with that inquiry into the rise in girls accessing GIDs? It's a secret, apparently.

[MrsSnippyPants]

Good article this morning from Caroline ffiske

"Well, it seems that there is a government inquiry. But what its terms are, we are not to be told. Is there a Conservative MP out there who is feeling a little bit uncomfortable about all this? This is your watch."

conservativewoman.co.uk/the-transgender-inquiry-were-not-allowed-to-know-about/

I’ll wager the inquiry is being done by someone or a group of people who have an vested interest.

That is interesting. It does the suggest that the certain civil servants with vested interests have got hold of this from the outset. I have no doubt that they have ensured that those civil servants in receipt of all the Stonewall bribes awards and hospitality will be all over this enquiry at every stage.

Snap NotBadConsidering

Sweepstake on who it is?

I’ll go for that creepy woke lawyer from Bristol who is doing the Scottish consultation.

What is going on there? Why are medics and HCPs not allowed to apply critical thinking?

It's really worrying

I hope Caroline is asking for an internal review of that decision not to answer her FOI. She has 40 days to put in a request

This is very worrying

It's also worth questioning whether civil servants / politicians pushing the Stonewall / GIRES / Mermaids line (both in this enquiry but also generally) are in breach of the Nolan principles of public life - see Integrity:
Holders of public office must avoid placing themselves under any obligation to people or organisations that might try inappropriately to influence them in their work. They should not act or take decisions in order to gain financial or other material benefits for themselves, their family, or their friends. They must declare and resolve any interests and relationships.
Surely those accepting awards, hospitality and funding from the likes of Stonewall etc should be declaring a conflict of interest as they are being influenced by them in their work?

That is an excellent point Uncompromisingwoman

When I worked in retail everyone was scrambling for IIP. Now it’s Stonewall inclusion awards for bringing in gender neutral Toilets
www.stonewall.org.uk/people/senior-champion-year-2019-jonathan-slater

Thanks Sunkisses I believe a review has been requested.

Siameasy - that's one very senior person in the Department for Education. Gets a Stonewall award for openly forcing women in the DfE to share toilets with their male colleagues. And this senior person oversees schools?

He is the first Permanent Secretary to attend the Stonewall face-to-face feedback meeting to hear first-hand about how the department might build on the positive work that has already been started, learn about best practice and lead change Stonewall are a political lobby group - how does this not breach the Nolan principles?

God it’s beyond a joke isn’t it. 1000s of girls deciding they’d rather not be girls, resignations all over the place and an ongoing court case from a former member of staff relating to their methods. I cannot think of any comparable situation which wouldn’t be dealt with as a matter of extreme urgency given the involvement of children. And yet, even the terms of the tender need to remain secret.

Surely if everything was entirely above board it would be routine to have the terms of the tender available on request as a bare minimum? How could it possibly be “not in the public interest” to disclose that?

They know. They all fucking know how wrong this is. They’ll be hoping it blows over. Fuck. That.

Indeed BadgertheBodger.
It is secrecy and deals being done behind closed doors that has got us into this appalling state. It defies belief that the government don't get this (until you look at the profiles of some of the major players as evidenced above).
The comments under the article suggest that many people are finally getting this.

If thousands of young female people suddenly got any other condition there would be a public enquiry.

Any. Other. Condition.

The Equalities Office say that they have withheld the information because they "have determined that the balance of public interest is in favour of withholding the information requested under Section 43(2) of the FOIA’."

Section 43(2) is about "Prejudice to commercial interests."

In order to apply section 43(2), the public authority must satisfy itself that disclosure of the information would, or would be likely to, prejudice or harm the commercial interests of any person (this can include the public authority holding it). This is known as the prejudice test.

ico.org.uk/media/for-organisations/documents/1178/commercial-interests-section-43-foia-guidance.pdf

Why would the terms of the tender hurt anyone's commercial interests? How can you put something out for tender without making it public? Has it just been allocated to cronies? Has James Caspian been given a chance to bid for it? Who is responsible for making this decision?

Why would the terms of the tender hurt anyone's commercial interests?

I'm fairly convinced that in many cases if they don't want to disclose something, they will give some spurious reason for non disclosure in the hope that the person making the request will just give up. It doesn't look as though that's going to happen here though if MrsSnippyPants is right about a review having been requested.

This is reminiscent of Edward Lord’s crooked survey where the City of London threw out 50pc of responses. Who advised them to do this? A one man band consultancy who won the survey contract via tender. The consultancy is run by a fellow Freemason. They had never done any such work before - nothing in surveys or statistical analysis or evidenced based policy making or anything. Their only credentials were a membership of the International Association of Survey Statisticians - a membership you can get online for free in five minutes with nothing more than a name and address.

This is corruption in plain sight.

These various agencies have been getting pretty dodgy with their transparency obligations recently, haven't they?

The Equalities Office said that the parameters of the research had not yet been confirmed, but would be made public “in due course”.
From an article in the Independent 2018.

I am going to write to my (new) MP asking her to find out what is happening (my DD is one of those affected). Can I suggest others do too?

Much as I agree with the need for the inquiry (and am sceptical that it will be unbiased and published), I made the mistake of reading the comments. I feel slightly unclean.

Apparently 'transgenderism' (is that even a word) is the fault of the left and women. The comment on gay marriage was particularly abhorrent.

I agree Tilder, those comments were way to the right of the Daily Mail.

I tried to FOI this and was also knocked back, and then requested an internal review that turned me down again!

For any parents in this thread (I'm one too) we have a support group at www.bayswatersupport.org.uk and a twitter @BayswaterSG.