Tempest v Rural Payments Agency Tribunal Thread 8

[myladydisdainisyetliving]

Previous thread: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5551959-tempest-v-rural-payments-agency-tribunal-thread-7

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.

Please 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.

Anna Widdecombe has died. RIP.

You may laugh, but I did read a post once where a bloke blamed poor old Bugs Bunny in this scene for making him trans.

HH - you agreed about what data shows (surveys about bullying discrim in civil service, data showing no confidence in reporting) with that in mind.
CA - don't think it will discourage wrongdoing, what it discourages is accusing a network of people with a protected belief of it
HH - your evidence points that from Jan23 onwards and throughout 23 that complaints did drop off, it did put them at a disadvant
CA it's speculation why complaints reduced, my theory after closing Yammer, the temp dropped, and less heated exchanges like we had in Nov Dec

What’s a PCP they’re talking about?

Fair point. To be a bit more nuanced: she can ask CA if it was deliberate; CA can say I can't speak about the state of mind of SEEN (or the Judge can step in and say "this witness can't answer that.).

But CA can answer a question like "do you accept you had no reason to believe it wasn't deliberate?" or "Could it have been deliberate?" or "It was unreasonable of you to think it wasn't deliberate, wasn't it?"

HH can certainly suggest it was deliberate, she doesn't need to shy away from that idea.

I'm working on drawing a timeline of events for Beetle's whiteboard

I have to say I look magnificent there!

HH the agender survey showed that the SEEN beliefs created hostile environment
CA the agender survey was across agender network with leading questions.
HH but at least they carried out. You did no analysis
AL we have had that q
HH - para 79 of your WS. All of actions taken were reactive not anticipatory?
CA - I think to an extent both - taking action to address how people thinking feeling
HH - you didn't sit down to assess matters listed para 79 at preventing trans discrim did you?
CA - our understanding was that we could not lawfully prevent as that would be discrim so we turned to seek reassure trans colleagues and to ensure SEEN weren't offensive to others.

Circles circles and more circles.

Wearisome to listen to as HH ploughs on still with the same questions she was toiling over with CA two days ago

Provision, criterion or practice.

Things which can be the root of indirect discrimination.

IMHO, this really doesn't feel like HH presenting a case; it feels like her fishing to find one...

I was considering doing that, but was afraid I'd mostly channel Charlie Day!

HH - before introd the 3rd PCP - you didn't analyse the discrim imposing that PCP would have on trans people
CA it didn't have a discrim effect. Having a series of posts accusing SEEN of being transphobic was not acceptable. We did everything we could to foster good relations but when we have one side that says only way forward is to disband SEEN and silence GC voices difficult to move on from there

CA it didn't have a discrim effect. Having a series of posts accusing SEEN of being transphobic was not acceptable. We did everything we could to foster good relations but when we have one side that says only way forward is to disband SEEN and silence GC voices difficult to move on from there

Does HH not realise that the more she goes on, the more CA is highlighting who the real bullies are?

HH the agender survey showed that the SEEN beliefs created hostile environment
CA the agender survey was across agender network with leading questions.

I want her to say

CA: Enough of this absolute twaddle Helen

The trouble is I think everyone will need a longer not a shorter lunch break to recover from this morning.

CA We did everything we could to foster good relations but when we have one side that says only way forward is to disband SEEN and silence GC voices difficult to move on from there

So much for the 'toxicity on both sides' claim, eh?

We did everything we could to foster good relations but when we have one side that says only way forward is to disband SEEN and silence GC voices difficult to move on from there

I think this is an example of the danger of cross examining an intelligent, eloquent and well-informed witness when you have a weak case. They come up with neat and tidy demolitions of everything you've been trying to persuade the panel about for the last few days.

I wouldn't be surprised if the Judge wrote that down verbatim and quotes it back in the judgment.

I'd think this were a ridiculous thing to try to argue (doesn't a tribunal essentially have to decide between two parties' version of reality?) but then I remember Sandie Peggie and Judge Kemp

Missed a question
HH a policy [refers to military - gay bisexual]
CA - OK to be gay and bi if don't tell anyone, that's the comparison
HH given your experience in EDI including work on hate crime, given your background, comparing a restriction to systemic policy in US military is offensive in extreme
CA sorry you feel that way, not meant to be offensive at all.
[me - not clear who says this ->]Refers to 'you can be what you like as long as you never say it.
HH that comparison triv suffering gay and lesbian
CA no it does not

I need a nap!

<oh for fucking fucks sake HH!!!>

Many apologies for getting ahead of TT, but her profile on her chambers website that says she's concise needs to be done under the trades description act.

HH - your comparison does that, it minimises C distress and reframes victim
CA - no it refers that saying you can't mention you can't have a protected characteristic.
CA - As a lesbian myself I do not trivialise this. [BOOM!]

Boom indeed.

‘HH the agender survey showed that the SEEN beliefs created hostile environment’

How? We don’t know anything about the credibility of that survey as a source of fact. It may have some honest responses, but we cannot rely on it as independent, objective fact. It could have been done in order to up the ante.

I’m going to do a survey in my house. The cats will also respond. Now my survey shows that HH is deliberately carrying out a mind numbing, apoplexy inducing filibuster, with inane, ill prepared, inept (not accepting that is inadvertent) performance. That is gospel because it is from my survey.