Reforms proposes "Women and Motherhood Protection Act"

[IwantToRetire]

Reform UK has announced plans to become the most pro-family government in British history, with its Women and Motherhood Protection Act.

The Act would bring together key protections currently scattered across different laws, including equal pay, sex discrimination, employment rights, unfair dismissal and maternity leave. Consolidating these in one clear legal framework will give women, mothers and families stronger protections under the law.

Reform UK believes that mothers should be celebrated and protected, not punished for bringing the next generation into the world.

That is why a Reform UK government would increase the time limit for pregnancy and maternity discrimination claims from three months to 12 months, giving new mothers far more time to challenge unfair treatment in the workplace. It would also preserve equal pay, maintain protections against sex discrimination, strengthen safeguards against dismissal during pregnancy and maternity leave, and enhance redundancy protections for new mothers.

The Act would also go beyond existing maternity protections by introducing explicit rights for breastfeeding mothers, protections for women undergoing fertility treatment, and new leave rights for parents who suffer miscarriage or stillbirth.

Reform UK’s Education, Skills and Equality spokeswoman Suella Braverman said: “As the first Cabinet Minister in British history to take maternity leave, and as a working mother of two children, I understand the challenges women face when balancing a career and family life. No woman should ever feel that becoming a mother will hold her back or leave her with fewer opportunities.”

Britain should be one of the best countries in the world to start and raise a family. That means celebrating motherhood, supporting working mothers and ensuring that women are not forced to choose between having children and building a successful career.

As Suella Braverman said: “A Reform UK government will be the most pro-woman, pro-mother and pro-family government in British history."

https://reformparty.uk/news/reform-uk-vows-to-stand-up-for-women-and-mothers

Look at the details, also the plan to abolish equality laws. Suella Braverman is misleading everyone.

Those things..... what are they called? Women. Not real people, of course. But useful for their reproductive systems, and to be unpaid house-servants i.e. slaves.

Kinder, Kuchë, Kirchë

It's becoming impossible to have an intelligent nuanced discussion on this site. This was the place I came to for openminded thoughtful critiques now it's just banal smears and insults.

Quite.

The proposal is a great one for women but has to be rubbished because it came from a party that, on this forum, can't do a single thing that's good.

Devil is always in the detail. Hopefully this is only the first part of what they would replace the Equality Act with. It would be interesting to see some analysis of the benefits/disbenefits of returning to separate pieces of legislation vs. the consolidated approach of the Equality Act.

I posted, not because I have any interest in reform, but on other threads many have said how they feel the Equality Act in lumping together different types of discrimination has not worked for women.

Such as how Stonewall and others manipulated the bad (or intentionally open to misinterpretation) wording of trans vs women's rights that despite the source of the proposal some might find this interesting.

And in case anyone is interested, even if only to be able to say in detail rather than who is saying is, this is Suella Braverman in the Telegraph. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/06/17/reform-government-will-strengthen-rights-women-mothers/

Archive version https://archive.is/sySHg

Concerning.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/jun/16/farages-plan-for-equal-pay-legislation-may-cost-female-workers-money-say-unions

TUC slams Reform’s “shameless and deceptive” attempt to distract from policies which slash women’s rights
https://www.tuc.org.uk/news/tuc-slams-reforms-shameless-and-deceptive-attempt-distract-policies-which-slash-womens-rights

Sorry - unintended duplicate of previous post.

I suspect because Reform's greater project being anti immigration & the fact right wing parties haven’t traditionally been pro women's rights this isn't about improving women's rights but delivering more white babies to 'fend off' the 'brown invasion' & 'cultural armageddon'.

Interestingly, Reform's anti immigration right wing counter part in Australia (One Nation) just announced their 'pro women/ baby' in initiatives with a plan to scrap child care subsidies for tax relief for a partner's taxes if one partner stays home to care for the children.

Put aside that this is all a blatant attempt to keep women careerless & pregnant, but who will replace them? They act as if women aren't necessarycontributors to the country services & its economic growth where their absence will no doubt require increased immigration to cover the loss.

Well we should definitely trust Unison’s position on women’s rights…

That’s a massive stretch based on nothing g but your apparent dislike of so called right wing parties…. Why is there no party on the so called left standing up for women’s rights to dignity and safety?

At least they have a history of supporting women in the work place.

Single sex spaces 'protecting' women from a few trans people don't have anywhere near the impact on women in the work place that their denial to its access would.

Because fear of 'the other' is a more conservative interest that when it comes to trans people is a matter of opinion rather than an objective necessity like access to the workplace that's also contrary to left wing ideology of equality & nuance.

Unions having to represent broad views particularly of the left can't take sides on contestable issues.

They do take sides though. You just agree.

Crazy idea - why can't we have protection for women in the workplace and recognition that male people who have womanly feelings are not in fact interchangeable with female people?

Because it's actually sexist as fuck to suggest mens and womens minds are so different that if a man thinks womanny enough thoughts then he is actually a women regardless of the sex of his body.

Unions don't take sides per se but are bound by principles that support policies aligning with their greater 'project' which prioritises workplace inclusion, employee safety, and preventing workplace division that creates segregated hostile environments.

I feed Labour don't even think women should have their own toilets. We can't trust Labour on Women's rights. Hell Starmer doesn't even know what a woman is.

Opinions being supported need to comply with principles. The left traditionally has a more nuanced approach to issues rather than interpreting them as black & white. There's more acceptance of diversity, a broader understanding of grey areas & encouragement of solidarity that acts as a bulwark against the right

I suspect the disconnect here with gender critical feminists isn't with unions but the left wing principles that underpin them.

I'm not scared of "the other".

I'm scared of the sexism that is necessary for one to believe a transgender personality is a genuine expression of an innate manhood or womanhood of mind in the body of the opposite sex.

I'm scared of that sexism being baked in to our law and culture by entities like governments, unions, employers and educators adopting well meaning adherence to a bundle of progressive sounding values without thinking through what they are actually endorsing.

I'm scared that if we allow the idea that some men are actually closer to being women than men because of how they think to become an accepted "fact", we are opening a back door to bring back all the old shitty sexism about what type of jobs and roles women are good for and what they are not.

I'm scared that if we start to allow the idea that physical sex isn't really a meaningful difference between men and women, we won't then be able to justify needing extra protection or support for the times when our sex really does matter.

And I am very very scared how quickly otherwise rational people switch to "burn the witch" when it comes to any discussion at all on this topic.

You suspect wrong then.

I can do nuance and difference til the cows come home.

What no one is yet justified is why all that nuance and difference isn't being accepted alongside sex rather than having to overwrite it.

It's not like sex doesn't exist, or have meaningful consequences especially for women. So why the fear of acknowledging that? Why do I as a female person have to be redefined as someone who shares some undefined feminiminity of the mind with trans women just because he thinks I do, whether that rings true to me about myself or not?

I’m in favour of legislation that forces capitalist societies to adapt to the fact that female lives are often very different from male lives and also that the manner in which our society operates frequently disadvantages women while claiming to give them equal treatment and opportunities.

Various threads on Mumsnet show that things like pregnancy, menopause, child rearing, or caring responsibilities can unfairly inhibit women’s ability to live full lives or to have the careers they want.

If a political party has a proposal to address these issues, I’m willing to listen to the proposal. And, at the very least, this new proposal might encourage other parties to reformulate and reconsider their offerings to female voters.

Not another thread on trans people.

Why must you centre this issue everywhere as if its the only one & effectively dominate the media space so other more impactful issues are silenced?

Is it any wonder that unions have rejected gender critical demands when they just smother other more salient issues being heard?

This is exactly why the right pursue this issue so doggedly because they know exactly its overpowering & divisive effect to other left wing issues.

They can’t really “align” with things that are illegal.

You were perfectly happy to engage on this until you got an awkward question you can’t answer.