Gillian Keegan pronounces

[Ramblingnamechanger]

On Chanel 4 news (I think) 22 August. Thinks that guidance for schools on “trans issues” is not coming any time soon, and when pressed stated that the guidance is not statutory anyway…so what would it be for, I wonder?

What a useless waste of space she is.

Keegan is a monumental dimwit.

She doesn't get it. She doesn't understand that children can't make adult decisions, she doesn't understand that parental consent is actually parental demand.

She doesn't understand that no female sport, even non contact ones are not to be surrendered because of tantrums.

With zero pressure Keegan would appease the trans lobby. At best, we'll see a fudge here. The fudged areas will have a negative impact on girls.

If it's not statutory, what's the point?

This is ridiculous. Why are we not being given proper clarity? Shocking. Ignoring the issue won't help anyone. It reminds me of a child who puts their hands over their eyes who thinks if they cannot see u, u can't see them.

Ive never believed they’d do it before the next election because they’ll want to make it a “wedge” issue during the election campaign.

They actually don’t care about children do they.

This is the guidance Stephen Whittle wrote for schools ten years ago.

Swhittle says that teachers don’t need to decide anything because that’s the job of the NHS paediatric gender service.

Dunno why we can’t just go back to this, no NHS specialist gender Dysphoria diagnosis = no social transition.

https://e-space.mmu.ac.uk/621105/1/03.%20Legal%20FctSht03_GenderVariantKids&Schools.pdf%20

Probably the mess of the legislation and the lack of clarification about how sex change relates to children (as the legislators who developed all this didn't imagine for a split second that trans activists would be allowed to relentlessly target children) means that their aim of safeguarding children is proving to be difficult.
If they'd tackled this when women first started raising concerns, then the principle of safeguarding children could have been established as the priority. Instead adults with fetishes have been allowed to hold the centre stage and determine the priorities. Removing them from influencing schools and forcing schools to prioritise children's safety and wellbeing over their demands is now proving to be legally problematic?

In a way that's useful advice as very few of the kids in schools appear to have an official diagnosis so it would sort the wheat from the chaff and stop silly teachers who applaud rainbow outings. It draws it back to being a serious medical condition where there may be different ways to handle it.

Except the toilet / changing issue

But legally that can't be formal till 18? So any male receiving the diagnosis should still be using male or single occupancy loos.

I’ve slightly overegged that, on a reread.

Nonetheless (and despite loads of guff) there are some bits in this old, pre big spike in teen referrals /ROGD social contagion that is quaintly sensible, eg the stuff about resistance/detransition.

imagine the uproar if all the girls grammars kicked out their ‘transboys’!

Funnily enough there are no mentions of toilets or changing rooms at at all - it’s almost as if PfC realised that letting boys in the girls facilities was a step too far for normies to accept 🤔

Lots of mentions of 'gender role' in that document. Do they define what they mean by this? Presumably stereotypes. So children 'transition' if they don't like the stereotypes for their own sex and prefer those of the opposite sex. So progressive.

It’s always stereotypes!

Skip to the end for the retconned anon adult story - pretty sure most readers of this board will recognise the story.

I feel a bit squeamish about the potential ethics violation of an author using their own ‘lived experience’ without being clear as to the source of that story.

The parents ‘wish fullfillment’? Surely that’s one of those things that never happen 🤔

The Mail have picked it up:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12435095/Education-Secretary-Gillian-Keegan-transgender-advice-schools.html

Regardless of one's party politics, it's hard to escape the conclusion that this government have simply given up any pretence of governing.

FFS!!!!

They will kick the can down the road until the election. They don't want to touch it.

The main parties are so working hard to get my vote.

I am not a lawyer but my understanding is that the government cannot simply issue guidance and give it the force of statutory guidance. Guidance is only statutory guidance if there is an Act of Parliament which gives the government the power to make it. Sometimes the Act will set out the need for a consultation before the guidance is issued.

As an example, the Admissions Code is Statutory Guidance. There is an Act that sets out the rules on school admissions and the Code provides guidance on it, in easier to understand language.

For any guidance on trans issues to be statutory guidance, there would first need to be an Act of Parliament allowing the Government to issue it.
I assume that the Equality Act does not give the Government the power to issue statutory guidance on trans issues in schools. A new Equality Act could do that though.

The point is, I think, that Acts of Parliament go through proper scrutiny by both Houses of Parliament before coming into force. Guidance doesn't. These arrangements stop the Government of the day from issuing statutory guidance on any subject they like without the necessary go ahead from Parliament.

I'm not defending the delay on the guidance. Just trying to explain why it won't be statutory guidance.

A lot of guidance in schools is non statutory. If schools choose to ignore it then - when challenged - they need to have a good reason that explains why they ignored it. Non statutory guidance is I think perfectly reasonable at present.
What is unacceptable is the complete lack of any guidance for schools which continues to allow some of the most unsuitable organisations & individuals in the world to influence policy and practice in schools.

This and if (as I suspect) Keegan is the one who believes in gender woo, Sunak needs to sack her or he risks that he won't have honoured a single one of his recent commitments by the next election. Remember he said he has daughters and so wants to protect girls, boys etc from sexualisation through PSHE in schools.

Article on this by Stephanie Davies Arai in the Critic

https://thecritic.co.uk/its-wrong-to-lie-to-children/

Oh FFS.

Sunak had one chance to make a difference here. Instead of banishing a rival for his job out of the country ie Kemi, he should have made her Edu Sec.

But no, he promoted the biggest genderwoo believer in his cabinet to the post.