Fears Rishi Sunak will renege on promise to clarify definition of biological sex

[IwantToRetire]

Rishi Sunak is facing calls to make a public “cast iron guarantee” to follow through on a pledge to rewrite equality law to protect women, amid Tory MPs’ fears that he will renege on his promise.

Conservative backbenchers are planning to challenge Maria Caulfield, the minister for women, to give an undertaking in the Commons that Mr Sunak will deliver on his promised legal changes to ensure that “mothers and women are not erased from public life”.

Sources close to the Prime Minister insist he remains committed to the pledge, with one saying that the Government is carefully considering advice from the Equality and Human Rights Commission on the matter and another saying, “It’s certainly not being delayed or dropped”.

But senior Tories fear that the party will lose its opportunity to change the law if Mr Sunak fails to act swiftly ahead of an election next year.

One backbencher said: “There is a debate within government about whether this is a hill to die on and it’s unclear how much of a row the Government wants, doing this in the run-up to an election. But if they can’t say what a woman is by the time we go into an election we’re in trouble.”

More ...

A Telegraph article reprinted by Yahoo Fears Rishi Sunak will renege on promise to clarify definition of biological sex (yahoo.com)

I wonder at the motive of the DT for pursuing this (not complaining just wondering)

Also confused:
Maria Caulfied is not the Minister for Women see https://www.gov.uk/government/people/maria-caulfield
Kemi Badenoch is the Minister for Women https://www.gov.uk/government/ministers/minister-for-women-and-equalities--3

Wonder why the article refers to MC as being the one who should ask Sunak in the House of Commons to clarify. Is there some signifigance in this that I dont understand?

Labour and Lib Dems aren’t mucking around when they call women dinosaurs, or they say that no one is interested, or that shrill bigoted women should not even get answers, or that women can have a penis.

They say it because they believe it.

It’s up to voters to decide but I’d say it’s madness to ignore the obvious.

The Conservative Party weren't mucking around either when they said TWAW and TMAM at the Despatch Box, wrt a Maternity Bill. Their members weren't mucking about when they reported women to the police and their employers for retweeting JKR.

The only mucking about the Tories have done, is pretending that they know what a woman is and that they are rolling back on their TWAW policies.

I missed Tory members reporting women for retweeting JKR, was it someone like Crispin Blunt?

Pretty sure this has now been done to actual death now, but where I live dont have SDP or communist party standing.

There is occassionally a independent candidate, usually from one of the mainstream parties but pissed off with some tiny thing that didnt go the way they wanted, so they throw out the teddy and stand as independent. Which is someone my area does not need to represent it.
I know what my area needs, and most of all it needs women to be a stand alone group, with single sex requirements as standard. I can guarantee mixed sex anything here will mean women wont be allowed out of the house.

Why do people not mind being called shrill, bigoted or dinosaurs or Ed Davey going on about women with penises?

Do they just look forward and think none of that will become more pronounced if they get in

Madness.

We have a year before the next election. Contact the SDP and Communist Party. The more interest they get, the more candidates they will field.

Women and women's rights are not safe under the Tories. They have failed us in every way.

Like I said, if it comes to light that they could have made this amendment now but chose instead to delay and use women's rights as an election carrot then, as far as I'm concerned, they can fuck right off. It is unacceptable and I hope Conservatives for Women will stick a rocket up their arse. That said, I should concede that I don't intend voting for them anyway. I'm resigned to hoping there's either an SDP candidate or an independent with a functioning brain.

The debate in WM Hall should decide it, surely? A statutory instrument won't take long to do?

Are they compelled to act on the conclusions of this kind of debate does anyone know?

I'm not quite sure Rosie Duffield forming an alliance with ultra right Christian Tory MP Miriam Cates is a great idea, who is anti abortion and equates trans women with child sexual abusers, i'm sure she'll throw womens rights back to the 1930s.

Having just seen a vulnerable woman left to her own devices during a crisis and then put in a MH unit where she was then sexually assaulted by a male patient... i do not share your faith whatsoever in the Tory party or Richi Sunak, they ve had 13 years to fuck up the NHS and have done a very good job in that time.

As for "deluded" work on your ability to construct an argument without insults.

IANAL but no, don't think the debate compels the government to do anything. It might be said to provide them with evidence if they do put a statutory instrument through. It will show they've taken advice (EHRC), listened to elected representatives, and weighed these things up in deciding to go ahead, perhaps.

If it's a statutory instrument that has to be voted on, that'll be interesting. IIRC practically no Labour MPs showed up for the S35 debate in Parliament. All parties will have to decide whether to whip, permit abstentions, the lot.

It would be good to get the legal side on this

I don’t recall this being a GE issue last time. Was there even daylight between the parties

I’ve come to it via mn FWR and only for last few years

Whilst I’d love it to just be finalised I’m also aware it’s a huge societal issue.

My least preferred option is not to discuss this at all, as Starmer wants

If there’s a debate, pushed to GE level fine. Voters can see the clear dividing lines and take ownership of outcome whether by sex or gender

That women have had to just bend without even allowing public debate or GE level input really gets to me

Let’s bash it out if needed

Accusations of being in cahoots with the "right wing" - tick

Total silence on the statements and behaviour of female Labour MPs and MSs - tick

"Do better" scolding - tick

Uh huh.

This sounds good too

Basically anything on this other than Starmer dismissing us as dinosaurs and Drakeford calling us shrill and bigoted

I dont think this will be an election issue.

But we have a real moment in time with the Westminster Hall debate to find out how serious the Tories are.

My fear that the Hall will be packed (not full) with MPs from various parties who will be responding to pressure from TRAs to make public statement against revising the EA saying it will take away trans rights.

I have no hope of a similar number of MPs turning up and speaking up for women's rights.

And no doubt the TRAs will organise some sort of public demonstration to allow the media to portray the event as a reactionary "anti-woke" mis-step by the Tories.

Even though the debate is a democratic response to public petitions that show (some of) the public want this discussed.

The chances of any outcome that will help women's rights are slim, partly because by having an opposing petition, the discussion that could have taken place focusing on why the wording needs clarification wont happen as it will just be tit for tat politics.

In relation to the debate the House of Commons Library still hasn't produced its briefing document even though the event is 6 days away of which 2 are the weekend.

Not that we need the briefing to tell what to think, but it might indicate how in terms of HoC business changes can be made - if agreed to!

Its not a accusation, its fact Cates has made many speeches on her beliefs, they are hardly centre right, i don't support anti abortionists, you do.

As i said earlier, i do not support Labour on timidity, i didn't think i had to say it again.

Yes throwing insults is not a great look is it? nor is your "tick" stuff.

You are a tory, thats pretty clear and nothing they do or say will change your vote, just be open with that?

For me, i will vote based on past performance and manifesto pledges, if Labour don't change and quick, my vote will go elsewhere.

I have never voted Tory in my life and I've voted in 13 general elections as well as numerous lical and regional elections.

But I don't trust Labour, the Lib Dems, the Greens or Plaid Cymru on women's rights as far as I could throw them.

And saying someone is "deluded" is not as insult like, say, calling someone an idiot. It means that that person believes something, in this case that the Labour party will act in a particular way, which evidence shows in so highly unlikely as to be virtually impossible.

Ask and ye shall receive, SunnyEgg!

https://sex-matters.org/posts/events/webinar-on-the-westminster-hall-debate/

This Thursday. Two legal experts discussing.

You are a tory, thats pretty clear and nothing they do or say will change your vote, just be open with that?

Again, you're accusing someone of 'being a tory', as if that's a personal quality. You keep making it into a simplistic tribal morality issue. People can vote for different parties. No need to hide it or feel good or ashamed of who one votes for.

So I can call someone "deluded" if they think the Tories will protect women's rights and it isn't an insult?

I don't hope for a change, mainly because of the track record of non-delivery of this government.

Thanks Arabella good spot! 🙌

On the GE issue I’d take anything that forces Starmer et al to show their hand, GE or not.

I couldn’t believe the deflection with insult from Drakeford

That’s the level of debate atm from Labour and we’ve all seen Ed Davey’s version

Would you prefer Labour / Lib Dem on this, even after all they’ve said?