His attitude towards this ruling is unhinged. He's not being objective about it at all. In fact, he's straight up lying. He is a QC so is bound to be seen as a cool headed authority on the law, so it's very depressing to see a legal professional behave in this way.
For example, he said the high court 'refused' to hear from a single trans person in the review. This makes me think he hasn't read the judgment because I recall at least three trans witnesses for the Tavistock, who all had favourable things to say about their treatment. So Maugham is either straight up lying, or he's made a massive mistake. He also repeats his claim that the court 'refused' to hear from a single trans charity. As I've mentioned before it's not particularly difficult to be able to intervene as a third party in a judicial review. The fact that neither Mermaids nor stonewall got permission to intervene suggests that their intervention either added nothing or was just straight up bad. If Jo wants to be mad at anyone for letting down trans kids he should be berating these charities for presenting such a poor case.
He then talks about 'suicide attempts' that he's heard of which is ...just crazily irresponsible language.
He finally berates white , privileged, upper middle class, privately educated people for talking about things they don't understand, and yet concedes that despite being white and posh and male he is using his voice to talk for trans people. Does he not think he's a member of that exceptionally privileged group of people?
And then his finale is to shriek that the ruling was a shameful, shameful, legal and moral blot for this country. But he's a tax lawyer. He doesn't work in family law, or medical law where an understanding of competency and consent is required (in fact, Jo has previously got in trouble for haughtily proclaiming that such areas of law are 'not prestigious'.) Shouldn't he really take his own advice and stop commenting on areas of the law he isn't trained in and doesn't understand?