Stonewall’s challenge to EHRC rejected

[tabbycatstripy]

The UN has rejected Stonewall’s ‘dossier’ of evidence against the EHRC. It remains a grade A rated human rights organisation.

Even if the EHRC has got the inside track, and its failings haven't precipitated a special review, we expect it will be considered shortly for periodic review.

Does this mean something analogous to: even if the student is correct in insisting that she hasn't failed out of college, this September she will nonetheless have to complete a re-registration process.

The vibes off it are fucking desperate.

I think it means ‘although we may have lost on the technical level...’

It's a bit "We are advancing to the rear" isn't it?

@Linguini

I wonder how Nancy Kelly feels having taken over operation of a sinking ship ...

She's hacking away at the hull with her own axe

He's not just a barrister, he's a QC! Not practising now, though, if I've understood this correctly, as he left his Chambers, and seemed to be on poor terms with colleagues there. Didn't he block the Head of Chambers on Twitter?

I was so pleased to see this, especially as it came back relatively fast. There obviously wasn’t much discussion required, which is significant. I feel it’s likely that even a few months ago, there would have been long deliberations.

@Linguini

I wonder how Nancy Kelly feels having taken over operation of a sinking ship ...

Also note how utterly silent Ruth Hunt has been since jumping ship too.

All the damage done to Stonewall and female rights by her pushing this men's sex rights movement.

Really great news. Such a relief that EHRC are being protected from this absolute nonsense.

Also note how utterly silent Ruth Hunt has been since jumping ship too.

Yes it’s odd that.

I've got a feeling his HoC made his views very clear. Maybe he is a Man U fan and has continued to celebrate them winning the Premier League every year since 2013.

From the EHRC statement

As we launch our new strategy, we are reaching out to organisations that have been critical of the EHRC, encouraging them to put aside past disagreements and to work with us and other like-minded organisations to protect everyone and to achieve a fairer society for all.”

Like minded organisations to protect everyone and achieve a fairer society for all

If the detractors carry on tantrumming, they’re basically saying they don’t want that. Out loud.

I suspect the other leading group - speaking for another 'protected characteristic' - that is preparing a submission to GANHRI about the EHRC's increasing tendency to advance the Government's political agenda rather than protecting disadvantaged communities from it is going to be Reclaiming Our Futures Alliance as a result of this.

I completely understand why the disability committee felt they should continue to exist. Between the UN finding the UK government breaches the human rights of disabled people; the immediate response to that report being essentially “you are fibbers & we are totes awesomes”; & the current position basically being be grateful damn you, disabled people really do need to trust the ECHR & feel we can rely on them. God knows there’s so much stuff to sort making the committee permanent would be reasonable, never mind just extending its term again.

The fact remains, however, it is desperately important that the EHRC ensure its working practices are transparent & that no group can be seen as being privileged over another. And who is responsible for that…?

Stonewall and the rest must be finding things rather difficult at the moment. They’ve been so used to flying under the radar, silencing anyone with a different opinion with “transphobe”, that they’ve had an easy ride up until very recently.

It may well be that the EHRC has done less for disability over the years Nitro. They used to do a lot. They also did a map of gaps (DV services) but that was years ago. I think the only other major project they did for women was maternity related and that was quite a while ago.

However, it seems disability has really not had much attention from them in recent years and I'm sure they used to be quite active on that protected characteristic. I can't even think of a project they've done in the last few years for disability but I think I got so disillusioned with them that I stopped looking on their site. So that's not to say they've done nothing but just that I can't think what.

Let's be honest, very few places even successfully manage to list the protected characteristics accurately, and almost all 'inclusion and diversity' training is in fact TQ+ training. Very few places ensure a full balance of training for the other 8 characteristics, or consider the intersection of those characteristics.

It's all become highly token and muddled.

It's been discussed on the boards for years that the experiment of packing all protected characteristics into one bundle under one law and one minister has just led to most of them vanishing in the heap. The briefs need separating out again, the laws need separating out again, and different ministers responsible for one separate group so that they know the complex details of that group and then represent that group's needs and interests properly. And ensure proper equality impact assessment for that group.

This would also address the issue that the needs of the groups are not always easily compatible, and one stop shop answers are insufficient.