Everyone knows Labour are going to win the election, but if you’re feeling like there’s no point in voting as the outcome is a foregone conclusion, I’d like to draw your attention to something really radical that is on offer tomorrow: 1/8
the opportunity to consign the Tories into third place in parliament. If the Liberal Democrats win more seats than the Tories, they will become the official opposition. That will give the LibDems the right to six questions a week at PMQs, 2/8
17 opposition days to push their agenda and hold votes and first right of reply to the King’s Speech. Issues such as Brexit, voting reform and the environment would get greater prominence. 3/8
Impartiality rules will require media outlets to ask the LibDems to comment on Labour’s performance in office. In short, it will be the LibDems holding Labour to account while the Tories fume from the sidelines. 4/8
This once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to kick the Tories into third place will only happen if enough people vote tactically to defeat their local Conservative. Such pragmatism could see dozens of ‘Portillo moments’ in the early hours of Friday morning 5/8
Liz Truss, Jacob Rees-Mogg, Ian Duncan Smith, Suella Braverman and Kimi Badenoch could all lose their seats. There is even a possibility that Rishi Sunak could be defeated, the first time ever that a sitting prime minister has been kicked out of parliament. 6/8
I realise many of you out there are frustrated with the choices you’re being offered by both Labour and the LibDems. But surely we can agree that they are preferable to the Tories? If you live in a constituency with a sitting Conservative MP, as I do, 7/8
please use this tactical voting website to find out how best to utilise your vote to push the Tories into third place on Thursday and change the balance of power in parliament for a generation. Spread the word! 8/8 stopthetories.vote
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
On 17 April, Dr Hilary Cass and her team met with LGBTQ+ support organisations to address misconceptions about her report. The responses given do not support claims made for the Cass Review by anti-trans activists 🧵
Q: Is the Cass Review advocating for all trans healthcare for 18-25 year olds to be stopped?
A: “No. Cass made recommendations to NHS England. NHS England is now responsible for reviewing them and deciding if, how, and when aspects would come into effect.”
Q: Is the Cass Review Report saying that trans people would be better off if they didn’t transition?
A: No. “The word ‘transition’ was used in the report to mean a transition between NHS services and not in reference to gender transition.”
Anti-trans activists waving Cass Report demand a rethink of Gillick & the sacking of anyone who stands up for trans rights, yet Cass says there is not enough evidence on which to make clinical decisions either way. That evidence lies in trans community. Will they be listened to?
Spent a couple of days this week trying to explain to people expressing their gender critical views why I believe they can sometimes be described as anti-trans activists. It all got a bit strung out, so I thought I'd pull my argument together in a single thread 🧵
First some background: On 23/1 Network Rail unveiled a Pride Pillar at London Bridge Station, an art installation aimed at educating people about LGBT+ flags and communities. Its purpose was to celebrate inclusion during LGBT+ history month networkrail.co.uk/stories/london…
Within days, prominent GC campaign group Sex Matters wrote to Network Rail demanding that the flags be removed. A Twitter storm of anti-trans protest was followed by columns in right wing papers denouncing the existence of the pillar.
Watching the Gender Wars doc last night, I was struck by the similarity between the experiences of Kathleen Stock and the trans woman Katy Jon Went. Both testified how they had struggled with their designated sexuality and gender 1/10
Went sought a number of therapies to avoid changing her body, but only when as a last resort she transitioned did she find instant relief. Likewise Stock spoke of how coming out as a lesbian made her comfortable with herself “I felt like a different person” 2/10
Both these women found relief by responding to their feelings, casting doubt on idea that sexuality and gender are ‘hardware’ issues - that biology is immutable and you must conform to whatever equipment nature has provided you with 3/10
Been getting some negative responses to my comment that Chris Williamson is part of the problem that Labour has with anti-semitism, rather than the solution. Here's a thread explaining why I believe this to be the case.
2. For those who don't know, the MP was suspended because of 'a pattern of behaviour' that included his complaint that the Labour Party had been 'too apologetic' about anti-semitism within its ranks
3. A number of those who responded to my post demanded to know what is anti-semitic about this comment. While it is true that CW's words do not contravene the IHRA working definition of anti-semitism, they do express a shocking disregard for Jewish sensitivities.