Baroness Falkner: Labour Party has abandoned women and feminism

[Signalbox]

“… She has unfinished business, however. Three months ago she submitted, with the support of the board, what she views as her legacy — statutory guidance on how public bodies, businesses and employers should interpret a seismic ruling by the Supreme Court. The ruling, on April 16, clarified that under the Equality Act 2010 the terms “women” and “sex” referred to “biological” sex, not acquired gender.

Since then, however, the guidance has gone nowhere. It is now somewhere in the bowels of the Department for Education, and there is no indication of when it will be published. The EHRC, Falkner says, has been told by the government that it is “all very complex and we need to take our time over it”.

She doesn’t buy it. “We’ve had external counsel, internal counsel, everybody’s looked at it. I mean, I’m so certain of the lawfulness of our code that I don’t think I’ve ever been so certain about anything before,” she says. “The other explanation simply is that they’re terrified of their MPs who would wish for trans self-identification or trans inclusion to prevail across all areas of society, including Section 3 of the Equality Act, and would wish for the exemptions not to exist.” …

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/baroness-falkner-labour-was-the-party-of-feminism-not-any-more-fzgjxswgn

Archive…

https://archive.ph/b9CcE

Government will implement Supreme Court ruling on definition of women, McFadden pledges after ex-EHRC chief’s criticism

Minister’s promise

This comes after news Labour women’s conference 2026 will be for biological women only...

THE Supreme Court’s ruling that the term “women” in the Equality Act refers to biological women will be implemented, Work & Pensions Secretary Pat McFadden said today, but he declined to give a date.
Mr McFadden was pressed on the issue after former Equality & Human Rights Commission (EHRC) chairwoman Baroness Kishwer Falkner criticised the delay in publishing statutory guidance on what it will mean for single-sex spaces.

Organisations are still awaiting updated guidance from the EHRC, which requires ministerial approval and would only come into force 40 days after the government has laid the draft code in Parliament.
Labour’s women’s conference next year will be for biological women only, with trans women not allowed access to the main conference hall or voting rights, though fringe meetings and exhibition spaces will be open to all.

The news — which broke on Friday — has been criticised by Labour for Trans Rights as “exclusionary,” but welcomed by Labour Women’s Declaration as in line with the Supreme Court judgement.

Labour cancelled its women’s conference this year, fearing a bust-up and potential legal challenges following the court’s ruling.
Baroness Falkner told Sky News’s Sunday Morning With Trevor Phillips that the government had had EHRC guidance since April — Mr McFadden had said it only received it in September — but added: “Let me make it clear — the guidance is just a navigational tool. The law of the land was determined on April 16 [by the Supreme Court].”
She also criticised MPs’ lack of understanding of the law as revealed in parliamentary briefings.

“On the code of practice, we did parliamentary briefings with MPs… my heart sank — [they] didn’t have an idea of the Equality Act at all.”

From an article in the Morning Star https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/government-will-implement-supreme-court-ruling-definition-women-mcfadden-pledges-after-ex posted (in full?) on Labour Heartlands facebook page https://www.facebook.com/Labourheartlands/posts/government-will-implement-supreme-court-ruling-on-definition-of-women-mcfadden-p/1197939755850242/

At some point, Labour will definitely get around to protecting women's rights and resources. They definitely believe in them, but .....

well it's all a bit busy. Just carry on for the moment girls, we'll get around to you when we have time and the more important things are done. In a few years. Maybe. Possibly in the next term in govt after the election, if it fits in.

Bloody bastarding hell, how many of us have heard that from Labour for how many decades now?

I think Labour's Commitment To Protecting Women and Girls goes to a different school. That's why we haven't seen it.

Damn, there are some days when I really miss the laugh reaction.

🤣🤣

Was Labour "the" feminist party though?
I mean, they understood that helping women helped the economy, so things like Surestart and free meals for kids certainly helped women, but that is purely because we still see kids as a female issue rather than both genders. Everything for kids ends up being "for women" when actually it is usually scraping single mothers off the floor because some idiot man is trying to control their finances.

We know we need female health hubs, yet the main discussion in the media is on prostate cancer, which the majority of men survive with few minor symptoms, yet female cancers are far more deadly and underdiagnosed.

We know AI is taking graduate jobs and part time/flexi jobs at such a pace we can't keep families from using benefits. However it is affecting women most, so no one is mentioning it because who profits? Men.

Trevor Phillips had a snidey journo called Steve Richards on who described Baroness Falkner as "naive."

If its who i think it is, he has two children who are a labour MP and a special advisor to someone in the cabinet.

I wonder if they shares his views on Falkner?

She has plenty working hard to remove her. Awful stuff.

Baroness Falkner is now retired from the EHRC but she does have her seat in the House of Lords if she needs a platform.

I don't think the points on cancer are true in most cases. Only bladder cancer has worse survival in females than males and there is no evidence that cancers (men or women) are underdiagnosed.

If anything, things like the breast screening programme are likely over diagnosing cancer (in that many of these diagnoses wouldn't kill someone even without treatment).

There were approximately 18,690 deaths occuring from the primary female-only cancers (ovarian, uterine, and cervical cancers) in 2023. In contrast 12,200 men die from prostate cancer each year in the UK.

In 2024, 74872 males and 64924 females died from cancer. The age standardised rates were 291 and 206 per 100000 population respectively.

(Taken from nomisweb.co.uk, ONS website under "life events", mortality)

I don't think this says females have more deadly cancers than males.

My point was about accessing help for women from specialised health hubs for female only cancers, as I said, to improve diagnosis and outcomes for women.
That would be an actual policy that would help women.
I compared it to the recent stories that were prevailing on prostate cancer to show that when it happens to men it gets onto the national news for days and Wes Streeting seems to give a shit.

There's currently a lot of lobbying going on for prostate cancer screening which should, if the government understands the evidence, be unsuccessful apart from the few groups identifed. (If the government understood the evidence, imo they'd also axe the breast screening programme for the same reasons they shouldn't implement one for prostate but I suspect that's probably on a par with claiming twaw)

All diagnostics and treatments are already carried out by specialist (to the type of suspected/confirmed cancer) teams in hubs (called hospitals).

These need to be hospitals because - fortunately - cancer by type isn't so common to make local hubs viable - and the unfortunately bit - within current constraints (enough specialist staff, cash)