No, over 20 years ago. The judge was eventually given the push. Just about everyone round here knows at least one woman or child screwed over by him though.
Similarly, imagine being a victim and same. e.g. We had a deeply misogynistic judge where I live and among other things, he let off my school headteacher after accusations of abusing kids so badly they had to be sectioned. His explanation? They were too mentally ill to trust their testimonies 🫠
And wouldn't be doing things like regularly bankrolling anti-abortion legal teams *cough*conrathe*cough* Or suing crisis shelters for the crime of not outing trans women they're helping.
They claim they gave it to parliament a week ago, yet have still not published it, and the gov't says they haven't received it 🤔 This could all be resolved easily by publicly publishing it as promised.
That sounds about right. Iirc previously they've said words to the affect of "We only consulted Biological Women because this doesn't concern the evil transes who have been banned since forever 🖕🏼🖕🏼"
They state they did one in their latest press release, and that they gave it to parliament on the 9th October 🤔 Wouldn't be surprised if the EHRC are lying again, especially as there's no way they could conclude the guidance is congruent with an Equality Impact Assessment.
Their latest press release, today, rebukes anyone who doesn't obey the interim as if it were law. They are in no way treating it as news, as they have been threatening action against organisations that don't follow.
So what? Your proposed code of practice goes vastly out of scope of the judgement (all women shortlists). And it has not been ratified by government. Rewriting equality law to mandate discrimination against a minority is the opposite of your remit.
Why are you, the Equality and Human Rights Commission So desperate to strip an entire minority of their equality and human rights? P.S. Please could you publish your Impact Assessment, as your guide would indicate the proposed service guide would fail it.
Daaayum. And of course Reeves' plan is to plunder the hoard instead of returning it to the victims because apparently she can't resist any opportunity to rob from the poor.
Oh, and as a reminder - despite that letter repeatedly claiming the new guidance has been in force for 6 months, it is not in force and never has been. And they should not be issuing blanket threats on the back of it.
Also, I note they talk about the Equality Impact Assessment. I can't find that, but I did find their guidance for doing one of these. This guidance increases discrimination. Removes opportunity. And makes trans people *and* cis people hate the EHRC more.
E.g. I like seeing musicals. In return for giving the local amdram troupe money, they let me see them perform. Which is something they do anyway, but in order to monetise it I make them perform in a theatre with a sound system instead of in a backroom of a community centre.
