Sue Evans leave to appeal - refused

[ArabellaSaurus]

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1995491904293949773.html

'This is not to decide if this is a good treatment but whether the CQC exercised its powers appropriately. There are 3 grounds of appeal, I have refused appeal on all 3 grounds as they have no reasonable possible chance of success.'

'Susan Evans
@sueevansprotect
, a former NHS psychiatric nurse and psychotherapist, and a mother, who remains anonymous, have been refused a judicial review of a CQC decision to grant a license to grant a licence to Gender Plus.'

https://x.com/JournalismSEEN/status/1995518153494081576

That's really disappointing.

Is the CQC, an allegedly independent regulator, still signed up to Stonewall?

I recall Stonewall has an extensive list of demands that must be followed by organisations which is why most regulatory bodies have dumped them because their anti women, anti child safeguarding demands clash with the requirement for regulators to be politically impartial.

That's a shame. And a disgrace that GenderPlus ever got the licence.

Sad news. Sue has done amazing work standing up against this madness

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/foi_request_stonewall_links_equa_2

'Question a. Any payments made to Stonewall Scotland, Stonewall UK, or any
affiliated bodies (including for membership of the Diversity Champions
programme or workplace equality indices);

Answer – We made one payment of £2,575.00 excluding VAT on 8 April 2024 to
the Diversity Champions Membership.'

'On 19 September 2025 the Care Inspectorate issued its internal review outcome (ref L7BCKTHZM2). The review maintained broad “not held” positions yet attached materials (e.g. “AllDocs R5 RA.pdf”) that reference the UKSC ruling and indicate definitions were “updated in line with current Stonewall version.” This suggests further governance records should exist.

Today (20 September 2025) I have applied to the Scottish Information Commissioner under FOISA s.47(1) for a formal decision on the adequacy of searches, use of s.17, advice-and-assist duties, and partial-disclosure obligations. '

Nothing further since then on that FOI. Well done to the person who has been digging for info.

Sorry, this is Scotland's Care Inspectorate, that may be different for England.

For anyone who may be interested, CQC are currently consulting on changes to the proposed assessment framework that they will use to assess health care providers.

https://www.cqc.org.uk/about-us/how-we-involve-you/consultations/improving-how-we-assess-and-rate-providers/respond

The consultation is open to all and runs to the 11th December. You can comment on the whole thing or just complete the question on equality. https://www.cqc.org.uk/about-us/how-we-involve-you/consultations/improving-how-we-assess-and-rate-providers/equality

I have used the consultation to make the point that Equity, safeguarding, consent, empathy and dignity are central to high-quality care, and it is essential that CQC inspections uphold all protected characteristics under the Equality Act.

I have also cited the SC judgement and made the point that single sex must do what it says on the tin.

Unfortunately, I missed the opportunity to make any points about data quality but the questions about who is responding at the end of the survey make predictable errors about gender identity. Wiser posters than me may be able to include this in their responses.

They're still on Sex Matters' list.

https://sex-matters.org/about-us/what-we-are-up-against/keeping-track-of-stonewall/