Help protect children from gaming harms.

Take our survey

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Tempest v Rural Payments Agency Tribunal Thread 2

1000 replies

myladydisdainisyetliving · 29/06/2026 13:03

Previous thread: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5546841-tempest-v-rural-payments-agency-tribunal-thread-follow-on-from-chair-of-seen-is-being-sued

TT substack: https://tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/tempest-vs-defra-and-rural-payments

Tempest (a TW) is claiming discrimination, harassment and/or victimisation on grounds of gender reassignment. Central to the claim is the existence of the Sex Equality and Equity Network in the Civil Service (SEEN). SEEN has been granted right to intervene. Parts of the original claim against the co-chair of SEEN (Elspeth Duemmer-Wrigley) and another party (Andreas Mueller) were struck out or narrowed. Another claimant, PQ, is no longer part of the case.

I will also note that Elspeth still has a garden in need of seeds and water to support the ability of SEEN to be an intervenor in this case. The claim originated because she said "only women menstruate" and a search with her name and those terms at the usual gardening website should point you to her plot.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
30
Boiledbeetle · 30/06/2026 11:44

ST: We are going round in circles. T people/ally comments taken down for slight infringement, ie disrespectful tone. Emails to stop colleagues sending any messages of support not even.

So OK for him and his mates to be disrespectful but if he had his way SEEN would have been punished by management for politely pointing out that the protected characteristics in a training module were incorrect and did not reflect the actual law.

Totally sane and rational thinking by the witness!

BeMoreBear · 30/06/2026 11:46

ST: Challenging, no undermining. Should be acceptable if the opposite way of challenging T people acceptable.

translation: When they say it, it's undermining. When we say it, it's simply challenging.

BeMoreBear · 30/06/2026 11:48

fanOfBen · 30/06/2026 11:39

From TT:

ST: My position is uneven moderation. Not for me to judge principles of communication. All decisions must be equal and they are not
AL: Another example, hate speech being protected under the characteristic of protected speech

AL: You cite this connection of hate speech and GC belief as something that should not have been removed. ST gives these examples of unfair moderation- they are appropriate.
ST: Some of these should have been removed. Some SEEN posts blizzardy not removed.

AL: Pro-trans comment to Andreas saying is belief is scientifically inaccurate. This is undermining his belief
ST: Challenging, no undermining. Should be acceptable if the opposite way of challenging T people acceptable.

AL: Borderline email sent to a manager, consistent approach to SEEN.
ST: Not taken down but the borderline email does not say anything about it being acceptable under the policy. Misleading line manager into believing colleague has breached policy and further action may be taken

AL: This is consistent. Not uneven
ST: We are going round in circles. T people/ally comments taken down for slight infringement, ie disrespectful tone. Emails to stop colleagues sending any messages of support not even.

Not only is ST not doing any real work, he's making sure nobody else gets a chance to do any real work, either!

Kirschcherries · 30/06/2026 11:48

BeMoreBear · 30/06/2026 11:46

ST: Challenging, no undermining. Should be acceptable if the opposite way of challenging T people acceptable.

translation: When they say it, it's undermining. When we say it, it's simply challenging.

But if they say anything it’s harassment!

TheyAreLovelyLovelyPeople · 30/06/2026 11:52

Just catching up. I feel a bit <eyebrows can't go any higher> at the rules for thee but not for me vibes from ST.

fanOfBen · 30/06/2026 11:53

From TT:

AL: Example- EA does not give GCs the right to believe in anything they want. Not more right than flat earth or climate denial. Given as an example of unfair moderation.
ST: All examples relate to the row underneath it as I cannot see how that one is justifiable

Discussion as to the rows being referenced.

J: Appears there is an issue with the excel sheet

Ongoing discussion between J and AL

MyAmpleSheep · 30/06/2026 11:55

fanOfBen · 30/06/2026 11:53

From TT:

AL: Example- EA does not give GCs the right to believe in anything they want. Not more right than flat earth or climate denial. Given as an example of unfair moderation.
ST: All examples relate to the row underneath it as I cannot see how that one is justifiable

Discussion as to the rows being referenced.

J: Appears there is an issue with the excel sheet

Ongoing discussion between J and AL

<Judge wonders what he did in a past life that was actually so bad>

SlackJawedDisbeliefXY · 30/06/2026 11:55

J: Appears there is an issue with the excel sheet
Ongoing discussion between J and AL

Does this mean that the secondary evidence from the spreadsheet is in fact inaccurate as well?

MarieDeGournay · 30/06/2026 11:57

ST: We are going round in circles.

Indeed. You saved the judge the bother of pointing that out😏

EmpressDomesticatednottamed · 30/06/2026 11:57

J: Appears there is an issue with the excel sheet
😂

MarieDeGournay · 30/06/2026 11:58

SlackJawedDisbeliefXY · 30/06/2026 11:55

J: Appears there is an issue with the excel sheet
Ongoing discussion between J and AL

Does this mean that the secondary evidence from the spreadsheet is in fact inaccurate as well?

To err is human, to fuck it up completely requires a spreadsheet😁

TheyAreLovelyLovelyPeople · 30/06/2026 11:58

EmpressDomesticatednottamed · 30/06/2026 11:57

J: Appears there is an issue with the excel sheet
😂

.

star trek facepalm GIF
TheyAreLovelyLovelyPeople · 30/06/2026 11:58

Honestly, you couldn't make it up Grin

fanOfBen · 30/06/2026 11:58

From TT:

AL: Challenge your suggestion of favorability to GC or SEEN comments. Andreas Muller comment about International Men's Day. Recorded as disrespectful in tone. Not removed as moderation pending. Was removed.
ST: Says not actively moderating, failure in moderation process.

ST: Removed months later, no one is looking at it by then
AL: Accept it was removed.
ST: Yes, but do not see this as equal treatment

AL: Andreas Muller, recorded and removed.
ST: Yes
AL: Removal within a few days
ST: Yes

AL: Clear example of a SEEN member having a post removed.
ST: It is an example, I did not say no moderation. Does not demonstrate anything itself.

My note: this is very pointless, isn't it?

Justabaker · 30/06/2026 12:01

J: Appears there is an issue with the excel sheet
😂

This tribunal has made me deeply regret the removal of the laughing emoji here.

BeMoreBear · 30/06/2026 12:01

J: Appears there is an issue with the excel sheet

I told you it was the work of the Devil! (I see you @murasaki ) 😁

pivot tables, I ask you...

EmpressDomesticatednottamed · 30/06/2026 12:01

My angels dancing on the heads of pins are lovely angels on lovely pins.
Your angels are horrid angels and your pins are evil. Because I said so.

BettyBooper · 30/06/2026 12:02

fanOfBen · 30/06/2026 11:53

From TT:

AL: Example- EA does not give GCs the right to believe in anything they want. Not more right than flat earth or climate denial. Given as an example of unfair moderation.
ST: All examples relate to the row underneath it as I cannot see how that one is justifiable

Discussion as to the rows being referenced.

J: Appears there is an issue with the excel sheet

Ongoing discussion between J and AL

Off point, but why shouldn't someone have the right to believe in a flat earth or deny climate change? Or believe anything they like for that matter?

EmpressaurusKitty · 30/06/2026 12:04

First a bundle, now an excel sheet…

BeMoreBear · 30/06/2026 12:05

fanOfBen · 30/06/2026 11:58

From TT:

AL: Challenge your suggestion of favorability to GC or SEEN comments. Andreas Muller comment about International Men's Day. Recorded as disrespectful in tone. Not removed as moderation pending. Was removed.
ST: Says not actively moderating, failure in moderation process.

ST: Removed months later, no one is looking at it by then
AL: Accept it was removed.
ST: Yes, but do not see this as equal treatment

AL: Andreas Muller, recorded and removed.
ST: Yes
AL: Removal within a few days
ST: Yes

AL: Clear example of a SEEN member having a post removed.
ST: It is an example, I did not say no moderation. Does not demonstrate anything itself.

My note: this is very pointless, isn't it?

I'm struggling a bit at the moment, the 'I have an argument for every one of your arguments/suggestions' - sounds just like my ex. She had an answer for EVERYTHING so I was always wrong. <shivers>

Kirschcherries · 30/06/2026 12:06

I suspect no one understood the importance of record keeping when first moderating Yammer. It would be a laborious process of screenshotting threads including the post to be moderated and cross referencing it to a spreadsheet.

fanOfBen · 30/06/2026 12:07

From TT:

AL: Lauren Davis' transactivist beliefs mainly trtying to silence women'- concern raised and post removed.
ST: Yes
AL: Last one, Lauren Davis- concerning women and sport and was removed.

ST: I have an issue with this one- action appears to have been taken before it was posted. Not sure this entry is accurate.
AL: Last one here them, podcast discussing Tavistock case, removal due to external link. Consistent moderation.

ST: It was moderated, they were given a chance to edit, for others it would have just been taken down. HR were contacted to post again for Andreas and Elspeth. Cannot recall page number of email demonstrating tit.

AL: C has charry picked, but spreadsheet demonstrates even moderation.
ST: Pattern clear from log in its entirety. Posts allowed to be put back up. SEEN can directly reach out to senior leaders. Moderation not fair or even

Break for lunch, resume at 1:15

My note: I want no more of this and some NC instead. Waah.

WrongKindOfFeminist · 30/06/2026 12:08

Just posting the relevant Mumsnet section from the witness statement, via Nick Wallis' blog:

'I also became aware though a colleague that a post had been made on the
external website Mumsnet on or around 8 November 2022, referencing SEEN
and including content from posts I had made on Yammer [337, 1542].
Anonymous commenters, many of whom acknowledged that they worked for
the civil service and specifically in DEFRA, made derogatory remarks about
my views, including describing me and others as “bullies” and stating
“’Unsafe’ at work. Riiiight. I pity their managers trying to restrain a massive eye
roll.” [page number to follow] Some commenters stated their intention to
send screenshots to Sex Matters and the press. The knowledge that my words
from an internal workplace platform had been copied and discussed on a
public forum, by people who could potentially identify me, caused me
significant anxiety. I was concerned for my personal safety and fearful that if
the media were to pick up on the thread, both I and other identifiable
colleagues would be put at risk. This was soon amplified when 4 days later,
someone attempted to access our home on two separate occasions. I honestly
believe it resulted in somebody somewhere finding out where I lived and
trying to break in. Knowing I was based in the Newcastle office wasn’t hard
to find out when SEEN members worked there. It was from then that I started
only attending the office on the same days as my wife for safety.'

Why is it that when a man who calls himself Samantha prefaces a comment with 'I honestly believe' it makes it sound so dodgy?

Note Tempest slides 'anonymous commenters' into civil servants there.

Not sure DEFRA can really be expected do much about people on the internet calling someone a prick.

But, glad to see a Mumsnet eyeroll made it into court documents. 😊

Kirschcherries · 30/06/2026 12:08

@fanOfBen My note: I want no more of this and some NC instead. Waah.

I second that. This is death by moderation.

myladydisdainisyetliving · 30/06/2026 12:09

As we’re on a break, the issue with the excel spreadsheet is that AL is taking the claimant to specific examples from the WS, and now the claimant is saying that where the WS is referring to “row X”, that numbering is now incorrect. Whether that is because the claimant can’t justify their example in court or whether they were sloppy in preparing their WS, who knows.

OP posts:
Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.