Call to Action please!

[Fishdoggy]

As we are all contacting the wonderful Baronesses and Lords may I ask you draw attention to the stealth misuse of language on the Government Home Office page. (Also see the Passport Office and the Parole and pg 5 of the Legal Aid)

See the Equality Objectives
We will not discriminate on grounds of age, caring responsibilities, disability, gender, gender identity, marriage and civil partnerships, part-time working, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sexual orientation or any other factor irrelevant to a person’s work.
www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office/about/equality-and-diversity

Across the country, charities and small hobbies are using this page to use as the EDI in their constitutions. This is deliberate by civil servants, it's embedding "gender" not Sex deep into our culture. Obviously my own group listened to me and changed the wording to follow the EA2010 but others won't realise.

My MP understands my point but doesn't think the Home Office are trying to re-write the EA2010. I disagree with him, it's imperative the words are accurate and correct at the source of information.
There is a complaint form at the bottom of the page but I am finding as fast as I report, my cases get closed without response. I've told Baroness Nicholson and copied in Liz Truss. I've been advised this is a numbers game and to make a nuisance of myself until the page is corrected.

Good Mumsnetters, please can you do what you do so well? Add your voices, write to the HoL and your MP and please let's disinfect the rot of stealth misinformation.

Thank you. Wendy Johnson. (I am not afraid to be named)

They didn’t reply in 3 months so Lord Hunt has raised it in the HoL via written questions yesterday.

I am hoping this will encourage all department’s to check they are referencing the protected characteristics correctly.

A department may extend protections to its team more widely than the PC but they shouldn’t be leaving one out.

Thank you for the update. My MP passed my correspondence to Baroness Berridge, she replied (unsatisfactorily) and I responded to that about two months ago. No further reply from her.

I will eagerly await the response to the questions in the HoL. Diary note made for 22 June.

Thank you Lord Hunt.

@ItsAllGoingToBeFine

Although many people make a distinction between a person’s sex and their gender, this is not a distinction that is often re-produced in day-to-day usage of the terms, nor in the law, which uses the two terms interchangeably.

That's a rather alarming statement...

Also not true with regard to the EA.

The two words were deliberately used interchangeably and confusingly in the GRA and remained in place despite the fact that objections were made at the time.

Which is what I keep saying. In law you’re either male or female, which is the same as being a man or woman. If you’re legally a female, you’re legally a woman.

Although many people make a distinction between a person’s sex and their gender, this is not a distinction that is often re-produced in day-to-day usage of the terms, nor in the law, which uses the two terms interchangeably.

Which is why the words used in legal acts—such as EA2010—are there.

Legal acts do have a tendency to contradict one another in terminology, but let’s now “get ahead of the law” when attempting to interpret or quote the law.

This, like most things these days, needs a case to cement the position.

In the meantime, I would suggest to Alan that his department might want to reproduce the law as passed and published rather than take it upon themselves to redefine it through their perceptions of language evolution.

How dare they decide what the lawmakers meant when they wrote this into law.

^^**Although many people make a distinction between a person’s sex and their gender, this is not a distinction that is often re-produced in day-to-day usage of the terms, nor in the law, which uses the two terms interchangeably

Am I reading this correctly- the flipping government Equalities Office is misrepresenting the EA?! What chance do we have of explaining to organisations that they’re misrepresenting the EA when the Equalities Office don’t get it right and insist it doesn’t matter when directly asked about it.

In addition to my MP, is Liz Truss the best person to email about this? Or Lord Hunt? Probably all of them I guess.

I wonder if the GEO will have changed their position now in light of everything that has happened. Liz Truss would probably not be very happy if they were still saying this

FFS - as someone who pays Alan’s salary (along with all tax payers) I am not impressed with his response.
Who can we write to?

Done. I'll get my partner to do it tomorrow.

GOOD NEWS

The Home Office Equality and Diversity page has changed. It now lists the protected characteristics properly. The questionable language has gone (see screenshot for how it used to read). They have also updated their external benchmarking wording slightly.

www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office/about/equality-and-diversity

Thanks to Lord Hunt and the Baroness for their hard work.

Fantastic. Good work, everybody.

Hope mr. Alan is choking on his bile.

Yes ✊😀

GOOD NEWS

Fantastic

Brilliant to see! If it has to be done one by one then that is what we will do.

Huge thanks to the Baroness and Lord Hunt.

The GEO have left Stonewall so that should stop the muddle over the actual wording of the Equality Act.

Is this the best place to add more examples?

Charity commission (This was updated 12 Nov)
factors such as age; gender; gender identity; race; religion or belief; marriage and civil partnership; religion; sexual orientation; disability; pregnancy and maternity.
www.gov.uk/government/publications/how-the-charity-commission-appoints-interim-managers/how-the-charity-commission-appoints-interim-managers

Ofsted
‘Children are treated with dignity and respect. They experience care and help that are sensitive and responsive to their identity and family history, including age, disability, ethnicity, faith or belief, gender, gender identity, language, race and sexual orientation
www.gov.uk/government/consultations/social-care-common-inspection-framework-review-interim-inspections-of-childrens-homes-and-residential-holiday-schemes-for-disabled-children/equality-diversity-and-inclusion-statement-interim-inspections-of-childrens-homes-and-residential-holiday-schemes-for-disabled-children

NHS - DoHSC
The equality duty covers the 9 protected characteristics: age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex (gender) and sexual orientation.
www.gov.uk/government/consultations/nhs-pension-scheme-proposed-changes-to-member-contributions/nhs-pension-scheme-proposed-changes-to-member-contributions-from-1-april-2022

Oh, I missed this earlier! Wonderful news, and great to see other departments correcting, too. Wow.

Under “ Employers: preventing discrimination” it does say both “sex” and “gender reassignment”.

So that part is correctly written isn’t it?

Fishdoggy
I clicked on the page you linked under ‘Equality Objectives’ and saw this:

“ The Equality Act protects people against discrimination on the grounds of protected characteristics, of which there are 9:

age
disability
gender reassignment
marriage and civil partnership
pregnancy and maternity
race
religion or belief
sex
sexual orientation
We are required to consider all individuals in their day to day work, in shaping policy and in providing services. This is in line with the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED) introduced by the Equality Act 2010.”

Isn’t that correct language?
I am perhaps not finding the exact page you were referring to.

@ScrollingLeaves the original link in the OP was corrected 17th June upthread. I just added some more examples,

Perhaps I should have started a new thread but there was so much good advice here I didn't want to reinvent it all

@FindTheTruth
I apologise - I never noticed the date. I’ll catch up with the thread and follow it up.