Hampstead Heath Ladies Pond - considering the SC judgement

[QuetzalTerfLus]

Apparently the CoLC is considering its position

https://www.hamhigh.co.uk/news/25109343.equality-ruling-affect-hampstead-heath-swimming-pond/

The EHRC seem to be flexing on Scotland. Which I suppose is politically safer to have a go at the SNP - esp when the Scots are also getting fed up with them. They were supposed to have a meeting with Scotgov last week but then it got cancelled. I wish they would just get on an slap a big fine on them. That worked a treat when Sussex Uni got a £585k fine - uni policies were withdrawn or suspended within the week after years of inactivity.... money talks.

And nothing upsets people more than NHS wasting money on lawyers and fines when they can't get to see a Dr.... Call for EHRC to fine NHS Fife and keep shouting it loud

I may be wrong, but IIRC, it was the City of London corp that changed it from single-sex to mixed sex - I don’t think the KLPA committee had any say in that.

I would try Katie Stewart, Executive Director Environment.

I think that her email address is [email protected]

No issue with male ponds. Just if they can only fund two over winter ladies and mixed may be the best option. As it accommodates everyone. Women are the most uncomfortable in mixed swimming / disadvantaged in exercise.

It's about most proportionate means to a legitimate aim which is when sex discrimination is allowed. In other areas you might have men's and mixed groups to encourage participation. Like having mens yoga classes and the rest mixed.

Those enforcement powers are encouraging.

Why should men be allowed in all 3 ponds FFS?!

The whole Hampstead Heath pond debacle was pushed along by a man who gets his rocks off wearing ladies clothing. It was never about the Corporation of London doing what was best for men, it was about reinforcing male supremecy.

Great book

Can someone reassure me then that if there is any removal of existing single sex facilities that this is legally going to be indirect discrimination and we can ask EHRC to step in?

Bearing in mind that the government advice seems to be that businesses should go gender neutral (because apparently this works for everyone ) I can see the path of least resistance being taken of relabelling as gender neutral rather than saying no to the TRAs. I worry that there could be a lot fewer single sex facilities than there are now.

Men are entitled to privacy and dignity away from women as much as vice versa, however much the safety aspect in one sided.

I am not totally aware of the political structure of the City of London, but wonder if contacting councillors (or whatever they are called) might have an effect. Even those not members of any political party might not want to be considered to be breaking the law in a way.

Based on this weekend's Let Women Speak, that doesn't seem to reflect the experience of the GC woman who they booted off the committee (and never explained what her crimes were but I think we can guess)... She did a short talk and mentioned it would be good for locals to make their views known to COL and the committee

Thanks @KnottyAuty, that’s helpful to know (and obviously awful for her) - what utter shits.

I knew the COL had made the decision and had done the EIA (with Stonewall’s help, I’m sure), and I knew the committee had gone along with it, but I didn’t know they had the same attitude.

I’ll write to both.

I wonder, as per the other thread, whether insurance might also be the key to this. Presumably CoLC has some kind of liabilities insurance for the ponds - and it would expose them to significant risk if their insurers were to pull that cover. If insurers cannot cover illegal activities, then transwomen (biological males, to quote the judgement) cannot be allowed in the Ladies Pond, whether or not the CoLC thinks it’s the right thing to do. And I would have thought that was applicable from the date of the SC judgement.

I thought (perhaps misremembered) that the CoLC position on transwomen in the Ladies Pond was partly driven by Edward Lord OBE, pronouns They Them and lead for sport -

https://democracy.cityoflondon.gov.uk/mgUserInfo.aspx?UID=292

Edward Lord’s email is [email protected] if anyone wants to cc Edward Lord in

Edward Lord (they/them), good grief I've seen it all now.

He looks incredibly oppressed and marginalised.

Oh I'd forgotten about him.

As I remember he rivalled even Dr Upton in logic and rationality, and in respect for women.

In all seriousness though, overprivileged wazzocks like him with a finger in every pie imaginable are probably the reason this rot has been allowed to take hold.

https://celord.com/

Good find! So Lord is a
Compliance Officer in one role, and also Lay Member, Employment Appeal Tribunal

you’d think Lord would be very aware of the legal and financial risks of ignoring a SC judgement!

Something about Edward Lord and Employment Tribunals triggered a distant memory that he’d been recused because of questions about impartiality. He was:

https://sex-matters.org/posts/the-legal-system/edward-lord-recused/

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4584264-edward-lord-has-been-recused-from-hearing-a-gender-critical-belief-case?reply=118357548

https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Higgs-v-Farmors-School-judgment-050722.pdf

The statement in the judgment sounds like he didn’t go voluntarily 👀

Oh, sounds as if he's definitely "got form".

I've just done a quick Google... City of London Councillors, Hampstead Heath Committee...

I think I would be encouraged by the fact the Chair and Deputy Chairman both seem to be KCs - perhaps we should consider writing to them? As legal types, they'll surely be keen on the rule of the law??

Membership · William Upton KC (Chair) · Gregory Jones KC (Alderman & Sheriff) (Deputy Chairman) · John Beyer · Councillor Marcus Boyland · Timothy Richard Butcher, ...

Wait a minute, Upton, did you say Upton? Not a relative of we-know-who I hope!

That had crossed my mind.....