Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Mermaids vs LGB Alliance and Charity Commissioner - First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) Thread 4

615 replies

nauticant · 07/11/2022 12:40

UPDATE: a transcript of the proceedings has been published and can be found here: lgballiance.org.uk/tribunal-transcript/

The Tribunal started on 9 September, witness testimony was heard from 12 to 15 September, and then, following a break, closing submissions are taking place on 7 and 8 November.

[This paragraph is probaby now redundant] To obtain access to view the proceedings, send a request email to [email protected] about case CA/2021/0013 - Mermaids vs Charity Commissioner and LGB Alliance and ask for permission to join. You then have to provide certain information and agree to a judge's direction in order to be able to join.

There is also live tweeting from www.twitter.com/tribunaltweets

Abbreviations:

J or judge: Presiding Judge, Judge Lynn Griffin
AJ or Judge: Assisted by Judge Joe Neville
MG: Mermaids counsel is Michael Gibbon KC
KM: LGB Alliance counsel is Karon Monaghan KC
AR: Karon is assisted by Akua Reindorf
IS: Charity Commission counsel is Iain Steele

(Also the witnesses, PR: Paul Roberts, JN: John Nicolson. BB: Belinda Bell, BJ: Beverley Jackson, KH: Kate Harris, and EG: Eileen Gallagher.)

Thread 1: www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4629679-mermaids-versus-lgb-alliance-in-court-today
Thread 2: www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4632780-mermaids-vs-lgb-alliance-and-charity-commissioner-first-tier-tribunal-general-regulatory-chameber-thread-2
Thread 3: www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4633653-mermaids-vs-lgb-alliance-and-charity-commissioner-first-tier-tribunal-general-regulatory-chamber-thread-3?page=31&reply=121335177
Thread 4: ongoing

Witnesses for the applicant (Mermaids):

Paul Roberts - CEO of LGBT Consortium (12 September)
John Nicolson MP - Deputy Chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Global LGBT+ Rights (13 September)
Dr Belinda Bell - Chair of trustees of Mermaids (13 September)

Witnesses for the respondent (LGB Alliance):

Beverley Jackson - Co-founder and trustee of LGB Alliance (13-14 September)
Kate Harris - Co-founder and trustee of LGB Alliance (14-15 September)
Eileen Gallagher OBE - Chair of trustees of LGB Alliance (15 September)

Witness Statements:

Paul Roberts: www.lgballiance.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Paul-Roberts-Witness-Statement-Exhibits.pdf
John Nicolson MP - www.lgballiance.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/John-Nicolson-Witness-Statement-Exhibits.pdf
Dr Belinda Bell: www.lgballiance.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Belinda-Bell-Witness-Statement-Exhibits.pdf
Beverley Jackson: www.lgballiance.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Bev-Jackson-Witness-Statement-Exhibits-1.pdf
Kate Harris: www.lgballiance.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Kate-Harris-Witness-Statement-Exhibits.pdf
Eileen Gallagher (two statements): www.lgballiance.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Eileen-Gallagher-Witness-Statement-Exhibits.pdf www.lgballiance.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Eileen-Gallagher-Second-Witness-Statement-Exhibits.pdf

Submissions:

www.lgballiance.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Volume-4-Submissions-CA.2021.0013.pdf

(Header format follows the gold standard established by @ickky)

post updated by MNHQ at OP's request in order to include the most up to date information.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
8
foodfiend · 07/11/2022 13:52

The incoming Chair of the CharityCommission, Orlando Fraser, made a very interesting speech last month, reiterating charities' rights to campaign. The bit that caught my eye was this:

"And there is a final, important point I would like to make in this area, which takes us back to the quality of charitable kindness I was commending earlier.
Most issues in society are complex. Rights and interests of individuals and groups are often in competition with one another. There is usually right, and value, to both sides of an argument.

"Sadly, that nuance is rarely reflected in the tone of public discourse, which is often coarse, and it threatens to become coarser still. Debates on many issues are polarised, and personal, and serve to further entrench existing standpoints.
This trend towards constant aggression presents a risk to our democratic culture...

"...I think English and Welsh charities engaging in political activity can, and should, be different too. Charities can model a better kind of public discourse than the aggression we sometimes sadly see from the party political debate. They can help teach others how to inspire and inform, rather than stifle and poison, reasoned debate. They should campaign with vigour and energy yes, but I believe they should do so also with tolerance and kindness.

"Charities should seek to win people over. Draw people to their cause, work to persuade those whose starting perspectives and allegiances may be different, and indeed initially hostile to their cause or the people they serve."

Or of course, you could just call people who disagree with you bigots and hate criminals and take them to court to try and destroy them.

Full speech here if you're interested: www.gov.uk/government/speeches/orlando-fraser-kc-speech-to-the-charity-commission-annual-public-meeting-2022

RocketPanda · 07/11/2022 13:58

You know when children are very small and keep asking why when you've said no to something and your reasons start getting more outlandish the more they ask why....Well this whole load of codswallop is starting to sound like that.

I'm in my car sneaking a look at TT on Twitter.

TastefulRainbowUnicorn · 07/11/2022 14:01

political campaigning can't be the only thing you do

this part is mildly concerning to me. TRAs have successfully blocked a lot of LGBA activities. Is there any danger that Mermaids could successfully argue that LGBA are only doing political campaigning, even though the TRA rentamob were the ones preventing other projects from getting off the ground?

nauticant · 07/11/2022 14:04

I do like a good "obiter".

OP posts:
BellaAmorosa · 07/11/2022 14:07

foodfiend · 07/11/2022 13:42

Charities and campaigning is indeed a bit of a tricky area, which is why some organisations retain more freedom by not being registered charities (eg Greenpeace) and others have separate charities and 'companies' within their structure, so that the company can take on the campaigning to leave their hands free.

The Charity Commission recently published a new 5m guide clarifying their guidance, which I think (IANAL) can be summarised by:

  • you can advocate for policies and political change to further your charitable objectives
  • you can't advocate for particular parties, or to influence how people might vote in an election
  • political campaigning can't be the only thing you do (you need to be doing either some other kinds of campaigning, like awareness raising or changing public opinion, or some other services or activities to further your objectives)

The examples in the CCommission's guide are quite helpful:

Example
An organisation set up to oppose a new runway at an airport applies for charity registration. The commission would reject the application as having a political purpose, as it would oppose the government’s policy on airports.

Example
An organisation set up to protect the environment applies for charity registration. The organisation carries out a range of activities, including some political activity aimed at securing a change in the government’s policy on airports. The commission would accept the application if it was clear that securing a change in government policy was not the continuing and sole activity of the charity, but part of a wider range of activities aimed at furthering its charitable purposes.

Example
An organisation which has been established to protect life and property by the prevention of all abortions applies for charity registration. Since the purpose can only be achieved through a change in law, the commission would reject the application as having a political purpose.

Example
An organisation was set up to campaign for an end to all animal experimentation in the UK. This was considered by the courts not to be charitable, because the only way of achieving its purpose was to seek a change in the law, thus its reason for existing would not come under any of the charitable purposes defined in charity law. It was also considered that an end to animal experimentation could well be against the public interest, as medical research would thus be curtailed. However, it is possible that a charity with wider animal welfare objects could campaign for amendments to the law on animal experimentation, where it could show that such amendments would be likely to support the delivery of its charitable purposes.

More here, quite readable: www.gov.uk/government/publications/speaking-out-guidance-on-campaigning-and-political-activity-by-charities-cc9/speaking-out-guidance-on-campaigning-and-political-activity-by-charities#the-key-questions

@foodfiend
Thanks, v informative.
It seems to me that LGBA fit quite neatly into the second example, whereas, if MG's arguments about EA2010 were openly espoused by MM and the many trans charities, they would fall foul of the political purposes test. Given that the law (as explained by the EHCR and Suella Braverman and the Scottish court in their census judgement) supports LGBA's interpretation of sex and Stonewall and others of their ilk do very little except try to get everyone to behave as if the law said what they want it to say. Comes close to seeking a change in the law or Government policy?

nilsmousehammer · 07/11/2022 14:08

MM accepts that a human rights charity is acceptable. On the other hand if they focus on a small group then there is no benefit. The question comes down to: what are their true purposes? Does a sufficient number of the public need LGBA?

Mermaids saying the quiet bit loud again - they have absolutely no self awareness.

They believe that LGBT+ is a political statement of TQ+ centric compliance. The argument they would appear to be trying to make is the one we see activists here try, which is yelling 'there's only six actual homosexuals who insist on being homosexual (evilly), and their socks, so not enough of you to matter!'.

The answer to which is, wtaf have you been smoking?

nauticant · 07/11/2022 14:16

Mermaids now onto the impact of LGBA's activities on Mermaids.

"LGBA engages on attacks on Mermaids and a handful of other organisations ... Mermaids and Stonewall sit at the top of the hitlist."

OP posts:
FannyCann · 07/11/2022 14:16

Place marking. Thanks for the thread nauticant

YouSirNeighMmmm · 07/11/2022 14:16

If standing up for LGB rights means that Stonewall and Mermaids are on the "hit list" then that is an open and shut case that S and M are homophobic and need to be shut down because homophobia is not in the public interest.

nauticant · 07/11/2022 14:25

MG wraps up (at this stage):
Should LGBA be registered as a charity?
Not being a charity does not prevent an institution pursuing its lawful objectives.
What is the clear and dominant message one gets? According to BJ it is an organisation to challenge the dominant theory of gender identity ideology.

OP posts:
nauticant · 07/11/2022 14:26

Now IS for the Charity Commission.

OP posts:
nauticant · 07/11/2022 14:27

It seems like this set of arguments is going to be far more instructive to lay listeners.

IS starts with LGBA's purposes.

OP posts:
nauticant · 07/11/2022 14:29

IS: Was LGBA established to promote pro-LGB interests or is it, as argued by Mermaids, anti-trans?

OP posts:
BoreOfWhabylon · 07/11/2022 14:29

Thanks for the thread @nauticant

Redshoeblueshoe · 07/11/2022 14:29

Thanks for the new thread nauticant

RoyalCorgi · 07/11/2022 14:30

nilsmousehammer · 07/11/2022 14:08

MM accepts that a human rights charity is acceptable. On the other hand if they focus on a small group then there is no benefit. The question comes down to: what are their true purposes? Does a sufficient number of the public need LGBA?

Mermaids saying the quiet bit loud again - they have absolutely no self awareness.

They believe that LGBT+ is a political statement of TQ+ centric compliance. The argument they would appear to be trying to make is the one we see activists here try, which is yelling 'there's only six actual homosexuals who insist on being homosexual (evilly), and their socks, so not enough of you to matter!'.

The answer to which is, wtaf have you been smoking?

Given the topsy-turvy nature of everything the Mermaids barrister is arguing, has it occurred to anyone else that this whole business would make a fine Gilbert and Sullivan operetta?

LipbalmOrKnickers · 07/11/2022 14:31

IS - Mermaids would have to prove LGBA stated aims were a sham and hid true purpose of anti-trans activities

nauticant · 07/11/2022 14:31

IS: "shams" is a feature of charity law which MG tried to play down but didn't disavow altogether.

OP posts:
LipbalmOrKnickers · 07/11/2022 14:32

Now saying M said they did not say it was a sham (which I assume has to meet a in level in law), but a revelation of evidence to the 'true purposes' of LGBA.

LipbalmOrKnickers · 07/11/2022 14:33

threshhold, not level. Couldn't think of the word threshold!

IdisagreeMrHochhauser · 07/11/2022 14:35

Nice to finally hear from the Charity Commission.

ArabellaScott · 07/11/2022 14:38

Are Mermaids tryinig to say that LGBA's stated aims etc, which were all carefully examined and approved by the CC, were actually a bunch of pretend stuff, and they are uncovering LGBA's secret ACTUAL aims?

Sounds like a shit episode of Scooby Doo.

nauticant · 07/11/2022 14:38

One interest of the CC is that it doesn't want to see its role being twisted into being a referee between opposing groups, which, to some degree, will be political in nature.

OP posts:
IdisagreeMrHochhauser · 07/11/2022 14:38

Tribunal has to sort the wheat from the chaff. Very gallantly doesn't point out that there is much chaff.

nauticant · 07/11/2022 14:39

Mermaids are actually saying that although it might look like that, they are in fact not saying that at all ArabellaScott. This isn't sarcasm, it's what they argued earlier.

OP posts: