Tempest v Rural Payments Agency Tribunal Thread 4

[myladydisdainisyetliving]

Previous thread: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5549122-tempest-v-rural-payments-agency-tribunal-thread-3

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.

I’ve just realised ( sorry for being slow) that GDPR will apply to ED in her capacity as aG chair. If there is evidence ED had sight of complaints in that capacity it’s potentially a breach of GDPR if she shared them with ST.

I thought this surely couldn't be true, that EDWARD LORD would be on the panel of an Employment Tribunal.

But it was.
https://christianconcern.com/resource/the-extraordinary-case-of-kristie-higgs/

NC someone feeding you info on who was on SEEN
ED - nobody will tell me who these people are

Why should she be told? Surely it's none of her business?

From TT:

NC - SH is defras of DG not obvious what her job title means but DG means it is very senior indeed
ED Yes
NC and either SH or someone access to her email was passing you details of SEEN
ED absol not, don't know her or anyone in her team

J - was there a finding that there had been a data breach?
ED no I don'ty know
J appears that you received notes of meeting between SEEN and you and Sarah
ED I don't remember seeing them

J - asks about Jan docs and why ED had them
ED - I don't know
NC - have you faced discp action over this?
ED - no
NC are you sure
ED - the data team spoke to me about the data that I had on my device afterwards, made clear not telling off but an advisory meeting

My note: goodness!

The lack of engagement is deliberate. From yesterday:

NC: You say WS 15 you see no need for anyone to say sex is binary - have I not just set out the need? To defend women's spaces?
ED: Why do they need defending? Nobody is saying - we're saying, does it matter and if so how much. This is not the conversation that needs to happen

(As an aside re: women's spaces, all toilets could be declared unisex tomorrow and women would still need sex specific rights at work because they rely on rights and resources that men don't, regardless of how they identify)

There is surely no way that ST and ED orchestrated the tribunal alone.

I keep forgetting that it is ST's claim because they have both sounded like terrible witnesses in someone else's case.

EO and HEO are not high-flying roles for people in their 50s in a massive CS department. And neither of them have been at all eloquent or reasoned in court. They are just two twerps with astonishingly high opinions of themselves.

Do we have any sense yet who within the CS is behind all this?

J appears that you received notes of meeting between SEEN and you and Sarah
ED I don't remember seeing them

Convenient.

J - asks about Jan docs and why ED had them
ED - I don't know
NC - have you faced discp action over this?
ED - no NC are you sure
ED - the data team spoke to me about the data that I had on my device afterwards, made clear not telling off but an advisory meeting

Yeah right..🙄

Is SH Sarah Homer

https://www.gov.uk/government/people/sarah-homer

From TT:

NC - so you had neither a formal or informal mgt intervention, to not do that again?
ED - no
NC - back to final short topic - agreed that the Womens Network is now the Gender Network, and that LGB networks are now LGBT, and there was a time with little knowledge of T,

Nc you have made a real difference in your role in a gender
ED yes
NC - there is much more observance of gender ideology, special days, announcing of pronouns
ED I guess that incl feminisim has made us all want to mark those days
NC - so achieved a shift to an adoption of

..your view
ED no this is global acceptance
NC almost universal adoption in civil service
ED most feminists are inc feminists, the ones that I know in civil service

J - inclus fem incl trans people
ED yes
NC - so your work place activism has ach an almost total victory, so you think no more activism?
ED everybody has reached the consensus that incl feminism is the way forwardTrans allies now have to defend 30 years of feminism, accept TWAW

She’s a liar - it would have been the first thing she looked at.

NC - so you had neither a formal or informal mgt intervention, to not do that again?
ED - no

I do hope NC has evidence that says otherwise.

There's a 7 missing from the start of Stella's quote, should read 75%.

NC - there is much more observance of gender ideology, special days, announcing of pronouns
ED I guess that incl feminisim has made us all want to mark those days

As smarmy as it is arugmentative😡

From TT:

NC - your position, is like that of an invading army that has subdued local population
No further questions
J - we have some questions, 5 minutes to discuss first, a few questions for you

Ten minutes break.

My note: yeah yeah, Naomi, mic drop, we expect no less :-)

Beautifully put Naomi!

ED everybody has reached the consensus that incl feminism is the way forwardTrans allies now have to defend 30 years of feminism, accept TWAW

'Everybody'? ???
Excuse me while I search for my eyes at the back of my head..🙄

"so you've achieved all of that while being the Biggest Secret"?

Ah, thank you, I wasn't sure whether it was a crap response rate all round or people avoiding that specific question- 75% makes a lot more sense, for a given value of "sense"!

Really interesting appropriation of the word ‘feminist’. So everyone who agrees that men can can become women and have access to all women’s spaces is an ‘inclusive feminist’. Right.
And her assertion that everyone agrees with this? Evidence please.

Is the eyeball retrieval clinic open yet?
There'll be a queue, if we can find it.

The hubris is a tad staggering.

'Everybody'?
that must mean that the feminist standing in front of her asking her qq, who very clearly does NOT accept ED's definition of feminism, and does not accept that TWAW, must be a nobody.

J - inclus fem incl trans people

I really wish NC would/could put him right on this one - as we all know, "inclusive feminine" includes trans-identified MEN, while leaving TIW out in the cold. Rad fems do the opposite.

I have got a headache from all the eye-rolling I have been doing reading ED and ST's responses and I am sure my blood pressure has gone up.

Planted some seeds this morning.

He might have been repeating what ED said to make it clear to himself [J] and the tribunal - TT is not word for word, so he may have said something like
'So you believe that incl feminism includes trans people?'
Just saying - it has been pointed out that things can come across as being more stark than they sounded in reality.