And now, a palate cleanser from Council leader Jane Meagher of @EdinburghLabour who clearly and concisely explained why women need single sex services and trauma-informed care. Cllr Meagher was one of the women who set up EWA and she is something of a legend!
For completeness, this is Cllr Watt of Labour who called the Green motion "irresponsible".
The Labour amendment set out how EWA actually operates, how this accords with the council contract, and how their approach is informed by the needs of service users. Also, that they are blinking good at it!
These are the Labour councillors. Also remember them at election - for the opposite reason to the Greens! edinburghlabour.org/ourcouncillors
Also deserving of thanks are the @EdinburghTories councillors.
This is the Conservative amendment. They commended EWA for following the law and welcomed their commitment to provide trauma-informed care while also remaining empathetic to anyone seeking help.
Cllr Jo Mowatt said she was old enough to remember when had to resign from work due to pregnancy. She defended the right of EWA to provide single sex services in line with the law: "What is more legitimate than that of providing services to women who have been abused?"
Cllr Marie-Clair Munro said "Our amendment reflects a commitment to safeguarding these critical services which provide vital support for women and girls who have experienced the profound trauma... of domestic abuse."
"Women's safety must always come first." Hear, hear!
Cllr Whyte said "I believe the motion itself is iniquitous". He said women "have to feel safe...We should respect their expertise around that" & pointed out that EWA gets the highest rating from the care inspector.
OK, back later after that reprieve of sanity from more lunacy!
An understandably emotional Jane Meagher outside the city chambers.
bbc.co.uk/news/articles/…
🧵In the same week that @scotgov appeared in court to force a Judicial Review over their Prison Guidance which allows violent male criminals to be housed alongside vulnerable women in the female estate, the outcome of a Fatal Accident Inquiry was reported into the death by suicide of a trans-identified male in the Separation and Reintegration Unit (SRU) at Perth Prison.
Aiden “Sarah” Riley was a deeply unwell, dangerous prisoner who had spent his entire adult life in the prison system or under supervision.
The case reveals the type of criminal transferred to the women’s estate under the SPS policy, the serious issues which are overlooked or ignored once “trans” enters the equation, and the determination of ideologically driven officers to push transfers - even when the male prisoner is also resistant.
Despite the bizarre tale which unfolds in the report, one of the judge’s recommendations is that proposed transfers of trans-identified prisoners need to be dealt with more swiftly. In light of everything we know, this is absurd and troubling. A transfer to the women's estate should have been out of the question. Women, it seems, will continue to be used as support animals for some very violent men. scotcourts.gov.uk/media/fn2b4bn1…
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/…
Aiden Riley was jailed for two years eight months in 2008 for stabbing Derek Graham (18) in Aberfeldy, Perth. Riley stabbed Graham in the back - the knife went through the chest wall and penetrated his left lung - had the angle been marginally different he would certainly have died. Riley was also 18 at the time of his conviction & on probation for another crime.
The BBC reported that Riley had been play-fighting with friends but took offence when he was hit. He went to his mother's house to pick up a knife and told her that he intended to kill someone. She told him to go to hospital but he later returned for the knife. After knifing Graham, he claimed that voices had told him to commit the crime.
We have been left with little choice as the Gov has refused to quash school & prison guidance. Papers have been served & the Gov has 21 days to respond. thetimes.com/uk/scotland/ar…
Trina Budge said the Scottish government had responded to the group’s legal victory with only “resistance and denial” and that two cabinet ministers the group had spoken to had refused “point blank” to withdraw unlawful documents. thetimes.com/uk/scotland/ar…
“Male murderers are still locked up in women’s prisons and children have returned to school after the summer holidays into a quagmire of confusion, with many councils still following government instructions to let some teenage boys change with the girls.”
🧵FRANKLY, yesterday’s woman, the former FM who left office in a miasma of her own (and her hubby’s) making is getting far too much attention. But there is some revisionism that is just too egregious to ignore. Especially as she has a platform denied to us.
If Sturgeon really thinks Oct 22 was the point the debate became “toxic” & hope of “common ground” disappeared, we wonder if she was drunk or in a coma for half a decade? Otherwise how to account for such wilful blindness? thetimes.com/article/291601…
Clearly, the shirt hit a nerve, “it seems blindingly obvious that a stunt like that was never going to elevate the debate or illuminate the issues at the heart of it.” But Sturgeon wasn’t interested in debate. Her zealotry made Thatcher’s commitment to the Poll Tax look measured.
The most concerning thing about the nonsense spouted about bone marrow transplants & chromosomal conditions yesterday was wondering how this would land with the panel.
Rare conditions are, sadly, too often weaponised (I fear "our" side is also guilty), so a 🧵
First of all, fun fact! Male DNA may be observable in women who have borne male children. This may persist for decades.
Similarly, following a transplant on male subjects, the Y chromosome may be absent in *some* cells, this does not alter genetic sex as determined by the original sex chromosomes.
Even if Dr Upton had a full stem cell transplant, he wouldn't change sex!
Absolutely extraordinary scenes today in @ScotParl in which it emerged that MSPs and staff are confused about how to use the lavatory - something many nursery children manage without such tortuous introspection.
Let's dive in! 🧵
There are many issues which may be considered "urgent" in Scotland today, but Patrick Harvie wanted a debate on toilets & the bonkers "open letter" from the fox-batterer and confused chums.
Remember, #HarvieHatesWomen.
@CGrahameMSP heroically tries to make the rational case for providing provisions for everyone according to law, protecting all the PCs, and not discriminating. Sounds good?
(Pat's colleague, @MaggieChapman was at the meeting when they signed off the decision - he could ask her?)
So, what to say about the inane interview from Sacha Deshmukh of @AmnestyUK on @BBCWomansHour?
Firstly, of course, this was an embarrassment for the @bbc, for @itsanitarani, and for the "human rights" charity none of whom, seemingly, were on top of basic facts.
Sacha confidently asserted that everyone else was reading the judgment - ALL 30 PAGES - wrong. He seemed mighty pleased that it was 30 pages (he mentioned it 3 times).
The problem? It is 88 pages, suggesting Sacha either read 1/3 of it or was misdirected by a minion.
Either way, we can be pretty confident that Sacha has not actually engaged with the text at all. More concerning for @BBCWomansHour, their presenter was not across the simplest detail.