WEC says Mary-Ann Stephenson is a middle manager not a leader and i paper agrees with them

[IwantToRetire]

... the chairs of the two committees that interrogated her at Westminster wrote to the Government opposing her selection, saying she “did not provide sufficient evidence to convince us that she has yet acquired the skills and leadership experience necessary” for such a role.

This is an unusual step. The letter – signed by Sarah Owen, an elected Labour woman of Chinese descent, and David Alton, a male ex-Liberal Democrat peer – said Dr Stephenson lacked “suitable depth of understanding” of core issues such as race and disability.

Those involved included Baroness Lawrence, the mother of murdered teenager Stephen Lawrence, and the respected human rights lawyer Baroness Kennedy; some were stunned by the banal answers they heard.

One told me it was like interviewing a middle-manager rather than someone with the stature and vision to steer a path through difficult issues tormenting the country. “This job needs a strong person with clear leadership and values when there’s so much divisiveness,” said another.

Bridget Phillipson, the Education and Equalities minister, ignored their objections to appoint Stephenson last week with “utmost confidence” as chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission.

Her decision made few waves, although this is an influential statutory body with strong enforcement powers over citizens, firms and institutions.
Yet it raises important issues extending far beyond the arrogance of an ambitious minister. For what is the point of a state watchdog if it simply serves as a government poodle? And why continue with an equalities quango if it ignores some of the most marginalised groups in society while driving open toxic divisions?

The appointment exposes the extent to which the pushback against transgender rights has come to overshadow the entire equalities debate. And it exposes Labour’s tremulous appeasement of the hard right as it observes the rise of Reform UK in terror.

The key reason Stephenson was handed this high-profile job seems to be that she played an active role for a decade supporting “gender-critical” views, signing letters accusing trans activists of seeking to silence cis women and aligning herself with prominent figures on one side of a brutal debate.

Full article at https://inews.co.uk/opinion/an-academic-an-arrogant-minister-and-a-fight-for-equality-that-has-gone-horribly-wrong-3840962

And can be read at https://archive.is/dWcG2

"Interviewing a middle manager". I'd love know which of the totally underwhelming, uninformed, and overtly hostile committtee members came out with that line?

Those committee members seem oblivious to the fact that many people actually watched that interview and that their impressions are totally the opposite. In fact, it was the committee members who seemed ill equipped for their role.

"appeasement of the far right". What planet on they on?

Apart from many other inaccuracies in the article, the fact is the Committee members were themselves so obsessed about trans rights that they never asked about other issues. I think there was one question on disability, and one on Human Rights / Race.

It was the fact that those interviewing her made it clear that for them there was only one issue.

They were the ones who conducted such a bad interview.

But then this knuckle-headed "reporter" set about dishing the dirt from HoC gossip to then go on to talk about perfectly valid issues about lack of support for people with disabilities.

But oh no, in fact he doesn't seem to think that issue isn't enough to write about on its own, he has to get in all the cliches about how GC is right wing and Labour is so frightened of Farage they cant appoint someone who is "trans friendly".

So apart from slurring MAS he of course has to then spread rumour and gossip and Lady Falkner.

Disgraceful article.

Politically dishonest, and personally malicious.

I think Einstein said something like 'the trouble with ignorance, is that it means you don't recognise intelligence when you hear it.' There's nobody on that committee who's smart enough to know how dumb they all are.

So far they've tried to smear her as transphobic.

When that didn't work, they tried to smear her as not having enough experience with race.

Now when that hasn't worked she's apparently only middle management material and out of her depth.

When that doesn't work they'll move onto something else.

Remember who these people are and the quality of their own arguments. The point is they only thing they have left is to attack her personally because various court decisions make it difficult for them to criticise the appointment in other ways.

I don’t believe a word of what Sarah Owen says. Her chairing of the WEC committee meeting with Baroness Faulkner was bloody awful. She should be sacked.

Didb’t read the SC judgement, biased, talked over people. Unfit to be an MP.

Sounds like she’s consistently inept. How do these idiots get their jobs?!

Are you or have you ever been a “terf”?
What the failed smear campaign against Dr Mary Ann Stephenson tells us about equality
https://thecritic.co.uk/are-you-or-have-you-ever-been-a-terf/

Queer theory - like an onion (hope image is readable)