Tomorrow's Mail front page: Labour trying to reverse reverse ferret

[teawamutu]

Fuck sake is this ever going to be over?

Please tell me this is bollocks to hold Starmer's feet to the fire, somebody?

https://x.com/MailOnlineScot/status/1913702114129330408

I agree - i genuinely think many REALLY don’t understand what’s happened.

theyre going through stages of something akin to grief; anger, disbelief and a desire to DO something being the current focus. Along the way they’ll eventually learn what they don’t understand. Narc behaviour will drive stubbornness and join the Joylon esque campaign train. Others will read the room and reverse ferret.

I do believe some have been deliberately not putting heads above parapets in order to be at the heart of these groups and leak when the time is right. I know many in the greens who have deliberately done this. I have done this in my own circles with strategic intent.

There is value to playing the long game.

I suggest you listen to this podcast:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/brand/p09yjmph

then look for info on single sex spaces and FOI results by Ermine Amies on your local NHS Trust. You’ll find they are all gone. There are no single sex spaces left anywhere for any women. It’s not been possible to ask for a woman dr for intimate care without risking your treatment being cancelled. It’s all there in the public domain. Women’s rights removed by stealth. Then come back to discuss

(agree with transdimensional)

True. The system worked in their favour. It looks like Reform could overcome that for the next one.

Quirks of the FPTP system; it giveth and it taketh away.

Last year, Labour won lots of rural and suburban constituencies where they've never had MPs elected and have little organisation, because voters were sick of the Tory government, and because the rightish vote was split.

Labour also won back the red wall seats they lost in 2019, but on low turnouts and with no enthusiasm.

All those seats would be vulnerable with only a small reduction in Labour support, never mind the tanking we've seen since last summer. There's a by-election coming up in Runcorn, by some metrics one of Labour's safest seats, and Starmer has conspicuously not gone there.

The megapolls and MRP projections are showing that, outside of inner London and Liverpool, there really aren't very many safe seats left for any party. There look like being lots of very tight three-way races.

Due to the quirks of the system, and Reform having support that's quite evenly spread rather than Lib Dem style regional strongholds, you could have Reform at 25% being the biggest party in the popular vote but in third place in terms of seats. Or you could see Reform push up to about 28% and start winning everywhere.

And if there's anti-Labour tactical voting or they leak support on multiple fronts - to Reform, the Greens, the SNP, the Hamas independents - then Starmer really is fucked.

Reducing or abolishing Corporation Tax and Inheritance Tax.Increase the ceiling for higher tax . Selling off the NHS. Trade deal with Trump. Although they agree with Labour about nationalising steel I think? Oh and stop the boats. Load of Trussonomics. How tf are Labour leaving the door open for these clowns....

Latest news

Starmer refuses to punish Labour MPs ‘plotting against trans ruling’
Dame Angela Eagle and Sir Chris Bryant spoke out against possible consequences of Supreme Court decision, according to leaked WhatsApps

Downing Street said that no action would be taken against the two ministers, claiming they were not trying to undermine the Supreme Court judgment.
While the Government has said that it welcomes the judgment, Sir Keir has not made any statement about Wednesday’s ruling, nor has he commented on yesterday’s vandalism of a suffragist statue by trans activists.
https://archive.is/iYHAD

Yes Eagle is a junior Minister in the Home Office, but as Minister of State for Border Security and Asylum. Her ministerial remit is not that relevant.

Bryant is way more concerning. As Helen Joyce says;
“As minister taking the new Data Bill, with its implications for the recording of sex, gender and identity, through Parliament, Sir Chris Bryant will be an important part of keeping that commitment and ensuring the law is followed.”

However Shabana Mahmood MP, Lord High Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice has key say over legal matters and she backs Labour Women's Declaration.

As does Eagle's equivalent Dame Diana Johnson, Minister of State (Home Office) - (Minister for Policing, Fire and Crime Prevention). Johnson has rather more relevant powers here.

Streeting also is on our side.

Also worth remembering both the SNP and the Lib Dems have said they accept the Supreme Court ruling. That really helps.
https://www.libdems.org.uk/news/article/supreme-court-ruling

We shall see how this plays out, but our position is WAY stronger since the Supreme Court ruled as it did. The TAs recent moves death threats/vandalism makes them weaker not stronger.

Doesn't KS have a child who identifies as trans?

I suppose most of the protestors are too young to know that groups who damage those statues tend to plummet in popularity. Serious own goal with those placards of hate too. The offenders will soon be quite famous - I slightly pity the first ones to get the focussed sunlight on them from the media. Did you see Farage has called for 10 year jail sentences? Upsetting for women that they’re more concerned with Statues than real people and sexual assaults. He’s been completely useless and here he comes crashing in at the end for his own ends. Blurgh

On exactly the same way the Democrats did; cultural arrogance and contempt, and a disconnect to daily life of the majority

No.

Seriously. We look at all news sources and use our judgement, just like you do, I hope.

Labour backbenchers can say and do what they want. It's slightly more concerning when you have ministers who appear to be plotting against sanity returning. Starmer isnt going to try and change the law but he probably isnt going to sack the ministers either.

Jo Bartosh has an article in Spiked about the 'Trans-activists temper tantrum' yesterday, the protest was all the usual people, saying the usual mantra's, with all the usual sign's. It sounded more pathetic and sad than dangerous, they've become a cliché, the narrative is leaving them behind, they just don't know it.

He forgot that he had a son and a daughter in an interview and "misspoke" saying he had 2 sons.
Other than that he quite rightly keeps his children away from politics - although I did one hear a rumour that his father was a toolmaker? 😀

I think many people are wondering what it is they want. They had lots of banners and made a lot of noise but no idea of what they're demanding. It may have worked 15 years ago but now most people are aware and against men in women and children's spaces.

There are multiple Labour MPs, including ministers, with trans identified children. There's no definitive list, but it's discussed on the Labour grapevine.

I don't know any details about KS's family. He's been very strict about keeping his children out of the spotlight. I think that's a good thing and I want to respect it.

I think the relevant thing is that he might feel unable to say anything that isn't affirming given how many people he knows have trans children.

This is what happens when you’ve appeased to be popular Mr Starmer. It jumps right back up and bites you on the Arsenal.

arse!!!

Yes. Helen Joyce has spoken about the chilling impact a parent of a gender confused child can have in the work place if they're proselytising about trans rights. It can stop people having open and important discussions about policy etc. In politics it's of course completely unacceptable - yet appears to be quite common.

I have great compassion for all these parents knowing how hard extreme transactivists work to promote parental alienation and how frightening it is to parent a child in these circumstances. Unfortunately the extent to which the personal has impacted on policy and practice in politics and workplaces everywhere is why we're in this mess.

Yup, it’ll bite him in the (executive) box. But he has to go there at massive taxpayers’ expense, ‘cos security obvs. 🙄

The future of Starmer’s wretched self-interest will be fascinating. He is doomed to appalling failure and disgrace IMO.

I think addressing the cost if living, NHS, education etc us genuinely really really difficult. It also involves making unpopular decisions.

Saying TWAW and be kind is very easy. And because these people live in an echo chamber, they dont realise that these views only resonate with a noisy few. Not most of the population.

The guidance has to fit with the law as per the ruling from the Supreme Court. The EHRC has effectively had a finger wagged at it for not interpreting the law correctly for years (thanks to the Stonewall acolytes who ran it prior to Baroness Falkner's appointment). I understand GC people are concerned and angry about what's happening, but I don't think hyperbole is helping.

This is so totally wrong I am baffled how anyone could have thought that.

In the past year having been bullied and harrased and falsely accused by TRAs at the EHRC, specifically Baroness Falkner has (working with Kemi Badenoch) had already started a process of challenging organisation either deliberately or because of being Stonewalled wrongly interpreting the SSS that the SSE can be applied to.

Following a survey of organisations that indicated their level of knowedge there was then a snap election.

After Labour got in Falkner asked for all the responses received which Labour refused to do saying basically most of them understood. Falkner public accused Labour of blocking what was a committment to sort the lack of clarity out.

Labour still didn't comply.

Then the EHRC wrote to the Government saying basically the was the EA and the impact on SSS was a complete mess and said that for the guidelines to make sense both the GRA and GRC should be disapplied from the EA

Please read that carefully. To not be aware of that, because it is so radical, as this is how Labour came up with the concept of legal women it to be totally behind the curve. ie more radical that the court ruling.

At this point in time, the EHRC is still waiting for a formal response from the Labour.

I suspect they will now say given the court case the EHRC will have to redo their revised guidelines, blah blah, blah blah. Because the last thing Labour wants is the GRA/GRC not to have a status in equality law.

If anything we should all be spending for more time on that, pressurising the Government to reply to the EHRC, instead of having endless replica threads where more time is spend re-iterating known facts as not being known.

To not even know who the allies are of sex based rights is disturbingly worrying.

The EHRC didn't get anything wrong, they had to apply guidelines in line with the law as written.

And were the first as far as I know have pointed the finger at what the real problem is.

That the GRA/GRC corrupts and undermine the protected characteristic of sex.

Even with the Court ruling of saying sex is biology, that doesn't not change the problem of the GRA/GRC being part of the EA.

The presence of these in the EA means every option of saying this should be a single sex service of whatever, cant just say this, because the GRC gives trans women rights.

Apart from anything else the fact the Baroness Falkner has turned round the EHRC from being captured in the short time she was there before being put of leave because of the false allegations against her, it is really, really shocking that any one would not be extremely thankful for the steps forward she has been able to make in a hopelessly bureaucratic post to move women's sex based rights forward.

Back to OP.

So boring. Everyone knows only the right wing papers print GC positive articles.

So anyone, including GC lesbians, and others leak to the DM or DT.

Also it would be extremely foolish to dismiss what might seem like a minority group within a minority group.

First of all Labour now dominates the Women and Equalities Committe. Gone are the days when Kemi Badenoch could make some of these handmaids look ridiculous.

Not forgetting it was the Women's And Equalities Committe in its previous formation that started the consultation on bringing in self id as a priority for the Committee before doing anyting about women.

And as everyone knows despite valiant efforts by FWR and other pro GC groupings in fact the number of responses to the consultation were in the majority for self id. I dont know which secret terf in Parliament got a number of these replies exclude because they seemed not to be genuine individual replies, but formulaic.

But that was a narrow escape.

And then, because of bad timing after the 2 petitions about the word ses in the EA, there was a majority for keeping the wording vague or open to interpretation.

Anyone who say the meeting about the petitions would know that there is a very powerful and vocal group who are determined to put trans rights before women's rights.

And these are in the Party that is now the Government.

They wont give up.

Neither will Stonewall.

And the media coverage of the protests on saturday were all about gender and trans rights.

In fact our only hope is that the various crisis that the UK is facing will continue to get worse so that even the fanatic TWAW lobby group realises they cant push for HoC time on this issue.

In terms of the public, if the economy gets any worse, they wont want any MPs time taken up with this.

So even if new guidelines are drawn up and distributed, we all know because we have experienced it, more people and companies, let alone the media and arts will listen to what Stonewall says.

re we dont have to worry Starmer is a lawyer and will follow the law.

We all know that not only has he not done that, that on occassions he has shown he doesn't even know what the law is.

eg he didn't seem to know, or chose not to acknowledge, that imposing starvation is a war crime.

One of the reasons Emily Thornberry become Attorney General despite most thinking she would because of her shadow role, is that they would have to get in someone that Starmer would actually listen to and so Richard Hermer was appointed. (Although of course that could just be what has been reported about - again - that Starmer has a woman problem.)

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2025/01/15/richard-hermer-attorney-general-keir-starmer-labour/
https://archive.is/rEpm3