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

SNP still 'in thrall to gender zealots' - Minister told to explain funding intervention

8 replies

IwantToRetire · 26/05/2025 01:52

Kaukab Stewart and Shirley-Anne Somerville personally intervened to ensure Stonewall and LGBT Youth Scotland were both eligible to be handed taxpayer cash.

Equalities minister Kaukab Stewart admitted she and cabinet secretary Shirley-Anne Somerville were "involved" in the decision to maintain funding to Stonewall and LGBT Youth Scotland.

Ms Stewart said: "I can confirm that I was involved, along with the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice, in the decision to continue with the Equality and Human Rights Fund (EHRF), through which LGBT Youth Scotland and Stonewall receive funding, for 2025/26."

Day to day management of the fund is usually administered by government quango Inspiring Scotland.

From a much longer article at https://www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/news/politics/snp-still-in-thrall-gender-35272536

SNP still 'in thrall to gender zealots' as Minister told to explain intervention

EXCLUSIVE: Kaukab Stewart and Shirley-Anne Somerville personally intervened to ensure Stonewall and LGBT Youth Scotland were both eligible to be handed taxpayer cash

https://www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/news/politics/snp-still-in-thrall-gender-35272536

OP posts:
IwantToRetire · 26/05/2025 01:53

oops - forgot to check if there is an existing thread. In which case please add the link to that.

Blush
OP posts:
TheywontletmehavethenameIwant · 26/05/2025 06:13

The government give money to quangos, the quangos then tell government who to give money to, the government then give the money to the quangos.

The system is rotten to it's core, time for a new system.

IwantToRetire · 26/05/2025 20:25

I think the point of the article was about the personal intervention by Ministers in the Scottish Government directly funding organisations that had faced public criticism.

Obviously abuse their positions of power to ensure that the group's whose agenda / politics they support got tax payers money.

Imagine the fuss there would have been if any MSP had been found to interfere to ensure that a genuinely women only ie biological service provided got funding.

OP posts:
Igmum · 29/05/2025 10:14

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Dwimmer · 29/05/2025 10:41

IwantToRetire · 26/05/2025 20:25

I think the point of the article was about the personal intervention by Ministers in the Scottish Government directly funding organisations that had faced public criticism.

Obviously abuse their positions of power to ensure that the group's whose agenda / politics they support got tax payers money.

Imagine the fuss there would have been if any MSP had been found to interfere to ensure that a genuinely women only ie biological service provided got funding.

Government funding groups who support the government’s agenda is how governments implement policy. It is what they do so that itself is hardly an abuse of power. BUT that agenda/policy should be laid before parliament and the funding allocations must be legal.

There are several problems here: Inspiring Scotland as a quango is not subject to FOI (unless it can be proved they are carrying out a direct public sector role - not sure how this works). They are effectively tendering for a service so this should be transparent. Personal interests should not be involved. And the organisations chosen need to operate legally.

It may not be possible to FOI inspiring Scotland, but you can government ministers.

In terms of your last sentence: the Scottish Government were demanding women only services were ‘trans inclusive’ as part of their funding conditions. I think the legality of this was questioned so this might have been removed from the public list of criteria (but I suspect still exists).

IwantToRetire · 29/05/2025 17:37

It is what they do so that itself is hardly an abuse of power. BUT that agenda/policy should be laid before parliament and the funding allocations must be legal.

As most funding is in relation to providing services (Governments cant fund campaigns) they should have to show that those getting the money are providing the best service. Not be given to groups who share a political outlook to the Government. eg even if funding was to go to trans inclusive services, as a proportion of overall need this would be tiny. That is what the problem is.

ie they are using money to discriminate against service providers who are best place to judge how and in what way the provide services, but dont get the money because they dont echo the political stance of that Government.

That is the issue.

And assuming there is some sort of Committee that overseas the financial decisions of the Government this should have been looked into.

OP posts:
OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread