Are gender critical beliefs views a protected belief?
Robin Moira White, lawyer, trans rights expert and commentator on my case wrote in 2021 that people with GC beliefs are not protected against discrimination if they voice them at work.
So following the EAT judgment White & Newbiggin rewrote the chapter in their book to recognise that a belief can only be excluded from protection if it akin to Naziism or totalitarianism in destroying others' rights.
Their re-drafted chapter appears to be the source of the often cited view that it is only holding the belief, not manifesting it, that is protected.
Of course that was also wrong.
This is not what Mr Justice Choudhury said at para 78 - at all. What he said is that manifestation may justifiably be restricted in some circumstances.
In 2023 Robin says again that my beliefs are not protected against discrimination.
This time Robin says my beliefs have changed, and are no longer worthy of respect, even if they were before.
Here are my "absolutist" beliefs as I expressed them in my witness statement in 2019.
The EAT and the tribunal also had a good look at the statement in the FairPlay for Women booklet and found nothing there that was not "worthy of respect in a democratic society"
The arguments made on behalf of the Women and Equalities Minister yesterday were a desperate attempt to shoehorn "case-by-case" back into the single sex services following the Supreme Court judgment.
At paragraph 36 she says there are there are no equivalent exceptions to the single sex service exceptions that apply to employers.
She seems to have forgotten the provisions about protection of women in Schedule 22!
She said that the FWS case was principally decided by reference to maternity rights.
It wasn't. The SC concluded "it important that the EA is interpreted in a clear & consistent way so that groups which share a PC can be identified by those on whom the Act imposes obligations so that they can perform those obligations in a practical way"
Ollie was Chair of the Civil Service Rainbow Alliance for 9 years from 2008 -2017, then held a number of roles in the GEO.
So all the time that the government was getting the law wrong and getting Stonewall prizes for he was leading this.
In 2012 he wrote in Civil Service World about his personal opinion that the government shouldn't renege on its commitment to this particular approach to diversity.
Peter Wilkins case exposes another public body (this one part of @DefenceHQ) that lost sight of the Equality Act and of civil service principles of impartiality and objectivity.
One colleague accused him of making a "threatening" FOI request when he tried to draw attention to @dstlmod 's Line Manager’s Guide.
The FOI was turned down but I tried again.
At first DSTL said they couldn't find the document.
I said "have another look, its on your intranet" and they located it.
Then they thought long and hard about whether they could withhold it on security grounds.
Lynn O'Donnell had writen a document entitled Line Managers Guide to supporting LGBT+ Identifying staff.
It included the old Stonewall definition of transphobia (which has now been withdrawn).
The action starts not long after the Forstater EAT judgment.
Prof Sophie Scott is awarded the Faraday Prize and O'Donnell goes onto DSTL's "distillery" chat forum to say 'tis a pity she's a TERF....and linked GC views to rise in violence against LGBT people
The High Court has granted an anonymity order in relation to three individual "trans and intersex" claimants in the Good Law Project's case against EHRC for its interim update.