Labour Party latest policy

[DelurkingLawyer]

twitter.com/UKLabour/status/1542825291273363456?s=20&t=cGbkq-bi6icR8osxjKW-Pw

“The Labour Party will:
Ban all conversion therapy
Protect and uphold the Equality Act
Require employers to create workplaces free from LGBT+ harassment
Bring in tougher sentences for LGBT+ hate crimes
Modernise the outdated Gender Recognition Act.”

It says a lot that after months of criticism about a lack of identifiable policy, one of the first concrete statements from Labour is on this subject.

What do they mean “workplaces free from LGBT+ harassment”? Isn’t there already protection under the law from harassment due to sexuality or gender reassignment? And why should one protected characteristic attract higher sentences for hate crimes than any other? Finally of course they throw in the dear old “we will protect the EqA” without seemingly any consideration of whether this is consistent with (eg) reforming the GRA (and no details of how it will be modernised, I see).

Meanwhile Wes Streeting tweets “my lifetime I’ve seen, been part of, and benefited from, the onward march towards LGBT equality, but those who would turn the clock back are visible, well-funded and organised.” Who could he possibly be taking a pot shot at?

The Labour Party will... lose my vote.

Starmer in his video saying the govt ‘chucked conversion therapy for the sake of the local elections’.

No, Keir. The govt excluded a ban on ‘trans conversion therapy’ for under 18s from the proposed ban on forced conversion therapy because there are no legally transitioned people under the age of 18, and many concerns that what your party is supporting amounts to the cultural conversion of gay and lesbian young people, along with very significant health consequences.

Get. A. Grip.

What do they propose to do about protecting safe spaces for females?

How many times have we said it?

Enthusiastic galloping towards removing women's equality, access, sex based rights, language, the rights of homosexuals, child safeguarding, and imprisoning those who want the right to their own beliefs and to speak the truth.

These are not just bumbling, corrupt twits, they are bloody dangerous and insane twits.

The corrupt bumblers get my vote. Although women are going to have to start voting tactically to keep the least fucking scary parties for women out of their power in their areas.

This is being interpreted on Twitter as Labour dropping their commitment to self-ID and generally being transphobic. No, I don’t know how.

And my membership. I’ve had it. This is the final straw for me.

I heard on the grapevine that Starmer is good mates with several people at GCC, abs a regular attender at their social events, more so than at his own former chambers. I suppose I shouldn’t be surprised.

What does this mean for women in practise?

not sure what the detail is

‘I heard on the grapevine that Starmer is good mates with several people at GCC...’

Of course he is. It’s written all over him. Privileged small-world Londoner.

@MarshaBradyo

It’s nothing good for us.

Sorry my last was a reply to @achillestoes first post.

Also YY to the totally disingenuous lie in the video that conversion therapy was dropped to win the May elections. It was 31 March, and after extensive criticism of its scope. Who the hell votes in a local election on the basis of a national policy decision announced 6 weeks earlier? If they’d made a big fanfare of it the day before the local elections maybe just about, but it would still be a stretch.

Well they can’t have it both ways, can they? The Tories can’t be manufacturing an artificial culture war nobody cares about and be using conversion therapy as a key plank of winning (not that they did!) at local level. This is either a big social issue (and therefore a very legitimate campaigning issue whatever you think of it) or it’s a non-issue, in which case it’s surprising to see KS digging out his most avant garde leather jacket to make a film about it.

Forgive my ignorance, what is GCC?

Garden Court Chambers.

By the way the woman talking about “IVF for queer women” is a Labour councillor in Barnet. Of course one knows that these videos are completely manufactured but he’s hardly ventured very far afield into a world of people who aren’t (a) party members (b) elected officials or (c) live more than 5 miles from his house, has he?

Keir Starmer puts his ear to the ground and hears the steady rumble of his own tumble dryer.

Thank you. So this is to do with Alison Bailey's tribunal case?

Any government cannot issue adult men with female birth certificates and maintain SSE. It's impossible.

God only knows what "Modernise the outdated Gender Recognition Act" means, but unless it means stop giving adult men female birth certificates, it not good for women and girls.

I remember a line manager saying to me years ago as I took over a chronic complainant client, "understand right now that whatever you do, however hard you work, you will never be able to make this client happy. Don't drive yourself mad trying. They're not looking for an end, the process of dissatisfaction and insufficiency is what is meeting their needs."

Very wise man he was.

Not this whole thread.

My comment that Starmer was friends with people at GCC was about Allison’s case to the extent that the evidence from members of GCC tended to suggest that they and other members of the chambers were committed to a number of aspects of trans rights activism. Hence, if he is friends with people from GCC, and this is what he is hearing from them, it’s not a great surprise if he wants to take policy in the directions identified in the tweet.

Oh no. I was beginning to hope they were seeing a little bit of sense on this.

The problem that Starmer has with all of this is that he's being banging on about Johnson being dishonest. How is he going to support the idea that and adult man can suddenly become female, and claim to be honest himself?

As usual they’re promising to do things with are diametrically opposed

uphold the equality act which would mean upholding womens rights to single sex spaces & bring in self ID (that’s what they mean by reforming the GRA)

they can’t do both

it’s the usual fudge hoping that women won’t notice

I imagine it means behave like Scotland.

“Modernise” is quite carefully chosen. It could mean reduce the fee and simplify the process for people who have undergone gender reassignment surgery following diagnosis. Or it could mean unrestricted self ID. It still enables Starmer to back pedal if (as seems bound to happen) self ID starts to look like it’s harming Labour.

Ironically many TRAs have also noticed that “modernise” is meaningless.

Yes no idea what modernise is meant to be

But it’s too risky to find out if they don’t expand and clarify