Britain’s equality watchdog has suspended an investigation into its chief amid a growing backlash over an attempted coup by trans-activist civil servants.
Baroness Falkner of Margravine, 68, the chairman of the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), was the target of a dossier of complaints from officials alleging “bullying”, “discrimination” and “harassment”.
It has plunged the watchdog into crisis, opening a schism between its leaders and the officials tasked with implementing their decisions to uphold equality law, and sparked outcry across the political spectrum since it emerged on Tuesday.
The EHRC had appointed Gavin Mansfield KC, an employment barrister, to conduct the probe at a cost to taxpayers of £100,000, while Baroness Falkner, who has been in charge since 2020, was having to pay tens of thousands of pounds for lawyers to defend herself.
Now, the investigation into the complaints has been suspended, hours after 54 cross-party peers including Lord Frost, Baron Roberts and Baroness Jenkin backed the EHRC chief, saying she had been “irresponsibly attacked”.
We must ensure its integrity’
The EHRC said on Friday lunchtime: “This investigation has been paused. This is while we seek legal advice on the impact of leaked confidential information. We must ensure its integrity and that it is fair to all parties concerned.”
The complaints made by the civil servants were dismissed as “ideological”, “vexatious” and a “political chess game” by the equality chief’s allies, who said she was “determined to fight this”.
The dossier, which was said to contain 40 allegedly vague allegations, bemoaned “a lack of psychological safety, i.e. the fear of who will be attacked next” and staff were “worried that the commission is becoming an unsafe place to work”. Another was said to have taken issue with someone rolling their eyes.
Another alleged that Baroness Falkner described Emma Laslett, a trans quiz contestant was at the centre of a BBC Radio 4 row for being included in an “all-women final”, as a “bloke in lipstick” which prompted the EHRC’s chief executive, Marcial Boo, to allegedly “rebuke” her in front of 21 other board members, though this was dismissed as “pretty trivial” by a source who said she was condemning abuse of trans people.
Trans fury at EHRC’s drive to defend women
The events coincide with the EHRC’s attempt to defend gender-critical views in the transgender debate since Lady Falkner took charge, which has infuriated trans activists.
This included Lady Falkner advising ministers earlier this year to update the definition of “sex” in the 2010 Equality Act to make clear that it refers to biological sex, not any self-ascribed identity.
Baroness Falkner said in a statement that she had “every confidence in being exonerated” and has neither been interviewed nor had any formal employment complaints filed against her, and was “presenting a detailed rebuttal”.
Multiple EHRC insiders had raised concerns internally about the investigation being “prejudiced” and “compromised” by leaks to Left-wing journalists, The Telegraph understands, with some believing that it was impossible for Lady Falkner to get a fair hearing.
On Thursday, 54 peers wrote to Ofcom, the broadcasting regulator, to “condemn in the strongest terms” a report into the furore by Channel 4 News earlier this week which saw 20 current and former disgruntled staff make “emotive, one-sided and unsubstantiated” anonymous claims about the EHRC’s chair and expert commissioners.
The peers said there was no mention of “the immense amount of abuse Baroness Falkner has been subjected to, both on social media and in real life” in the report, and accused the broadcaster of being “complicit” in attempts by a “small group of staff” to “undermine…Baroness Falkner [who] has an outstanding personal record opposing discrimination and prejudice of all kinds”.
Earlier this month, masked trans activists placed bottles of urine outside the EHRC offices in Westminster, which reportedly led to police erecting a cordon and carrying out a controlled explosion.
I guess that’s as good a reason as any to just switch off for the weekend.
So despite Falkner abusing her position to push her personal GC views on the population and back the impending Tory reforms to the EA to upend the lives of trans people and significantly roll back our rights, in spite of:
* The original intent of the EA
* The guidance issued with the EA
* Over a decade of case law testing the EA
* Legal cases the EHRC have even gone to court to defend
the EHRC is going along with the idea that the EA has always meant that trans exclusion is the default, and pretending there is absolutely nothing actually changing. And when the staff at the EHRC file complaints and point out just how dishonest and disingenuous that Falkner and the commissioners are being, it’s handwaved as a meritless coup?
What a cruel joke.
—
I’m angry enough to waste the time on breaking down this article further.
>The EHRC had appointed Gavin Mansfield KC, an employment barrister, to conduct the probe at a cost to taxpayers of £100,000, while Baroness Falkner, who has been in charge since 2020, was having to pay tens of thousands of pounds for lawyers to defend herself.
For the Telegraph to lament the costs to the taxpayer while it is happy to spend however much it’ll cost for the EHRC to produce their analysis and consult on the EA reforms, and Parliament to debate and pass the reforms, as well as the fact that such time could be spent on measures that actually make a positive difference, is comical.
The personal costs to Falkner are another matter, and while she is a Baroness substantial legal costs aren’t something to wish on anyone.
>Now, the investigation into the complaints has been suspended, hours after 54 cross-party peers including Lord Frost, Baron Roberts and Baroness Jenkin backed the EHRC chief, saying she had been “irresponsibly attacked”.
Criticism of her in a professional capacity is absolutely justified, and we aren’t even privy to how meritless complaints about her conduct are.
>The complaints made by the civil servants were dismissed as “ideological”, “vexatious” and a “political chess game” by the equality chief’s allies, who said she was “determined to fight this”.
“In our opinion, we’ve done nothing wrong and that’s what matters”.
>This included Lady Falkner advising ministers earlier this year to update the definition of “sex” in the 2010 Equality Act to make clear that it refers to biological sex, not any self-ascribed identity.
Glossing over the substance of the matter significantly. I’m genuinely livid that so much of the media is committed to, for lack of a better word, gaslight trans people over what the reforms do and how sweeping the upset to trans people’s lives will be.
Literally today an example of using the current EA to exclude trans women from a women’s space is in the headlines, and there have been countless examples of similar actions being done lawfully. There’s a reason the initial government response to the petition that started this was that the EA is already clear and that trans exclusion can be lawful. There is guidance, there is case law (some of which the EHRC has been directly involved in), there is no good faith way to say that things are currently inadequate.
Instead, and emphasised by aspects of Falkner’s response, the proposed change to the EA would see exclusion of trans people as the default. The most significant aspect of the changes, and even highlighted by Falker, are the Schedule 3 Part 7 exemptions that allow for the lawful exclusion of trans people when it comes to sex discrimination. These exemptions are what are currently used to exclude trans women from women’s spaces/services where necessary and justifiable, but these would change to be about the exclusion of trans men from women’s spaces/services. Never mind that that’s completely abhorrent to keep on the books, if the point of this change is to force trans men out of men’s spaces and trans women out of women’s spaces, turning around and allowing for wholesale denial of access because they have no other option is fucking barbaric. Literally the only silver lining there is it sounds like it’ll be a monumental bar to clear to justify such exclusion as proportionate. Additionally, provisions such as the Public Sector Equality Duty would require the exclusion of trans people in a manner that directly contrasts the status quo for entities in the public sector, i.e. NHS hospitals would be not be able to but trans women on women’s wards, schools would not be able to accommodate trans pupils, etc.
I know that other trans people have fixated on matters such as her calling a trans woman a man in lipstick, and finger wagging about how bad that is, but it’s missing the forest for the trees that someone with GC views has decided to come in and abuse her position as the head of the equalities quango, rig it against trans people and give a big thumbs up to the government taking an axe to the rights of trans people. It is disgusting and abhorrent and in any sane or just world, she’d be gone. Who cares what rude things she says, she has corrupted the EHRC with her own bigotry and is committing gross dereliction of her duty.
>On Thursday, 54 peers wrote to Ofcom, the broadcasting regulator, to “condemn in the strongest terms” a report into the furore by Channel 4 News earlier this week which saw 20 current and former disgruntled staff make “emotive, one-sided and unsubstantiated” anonymous claims about the EHRC’s chair and expert commissioners.
Not strictly related, but obligatory “abolish the HoL”. That said, cry me a fucking river, with how the media has behaved to trans people these past few years. It must be so hard to hear any pushback as someone who is virulently transphobic and abusing her position to try make trans people’s lives hell. Of course, the idea that these are “emotive” TRAs only at the EHRC to sabotage the fine, upstanding Baroness, and not people who would have gotten involved in the EHRC because they wanted to make a positive difference who are repulsed at what the EHRC has become sure is questionable at best.
Fuck this.
Typical Torygraph using TERF dogwhistles in their article. “Trans activists” is straight up a phrase used to belittle, dehumanise and make fun of trans rights campaigners. It’s sick.
The victim in this case claims Baroness Falkner, head of the EHRC, referred to her as “a bloke in lipstick”.
Mark Jenkinson, sitting member of parliaments Women and Equalities Select Committee, responded to this story by tweeting her photo and saying:
“I can’t even see the lipstick 💄”
The case has been dropped.
When you are trans and you complain about being bullied at work, you get further insulted and laughed at by an MP with an equalities remit and the case get dropped. This is Terf Island
The problem with transphobes’ tactics – like making a huge scene whenever they are called out – is that they work.
They work because their power to intimidate is only too apparent.
Their talk of conspiracies and ‘the blob’ is projection, of course.
But this lets some seriously awful people off the hook, and allow them to carry on with their own agenda.
Let’s not forget that this is an independent investigation that’s just been suspended.
5 comments
Britain’s equality watchdog has suspended an investigation into its chief amid a growing backlash over an attempted coup by trans-activist civil servants.
Baroness Falkner of Margravine, 68, the chairman of the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), was the target of a dossier of complaints from officials alleging “bullying”, “discrimination” and “harassment”.
It has plunged the watchdog into crisis, opening a schism between its leaders and the officials tasked with implementing their decisions to uphold equality law, and sparked outcry across the political spectrum since it emerged on Tuesday.
The EHRC had appointed Gavin Mansfield KC, an employment barrister, to conduct the probe at a cost to taxpayers of £100,000, while Baroness Falkner, who has been in charge since 2020, was having to pay tens of thousands of pounds for lawyers to defend herself.
Now, the investigation into the complaints has been suspended, hours after 54 cross-party peers including Lord Frost, Baron Roberts and Baroness Jenkin backed the EHRC chief, saying she had been “irresponsibly attacked”.
We must ensure its integrity’
The EHRC said on Friday lunchtime: “This investigation has been paused. This is while we seek legal advice on the impact of leaked confidential information. We must ensure its integrity and that it is fair to all parties concerned.”
The complaints made by the civil servants were dismissed as “ideological”, “vexatious” and a “political chess game” by the equality chief’s allies, who said she was “determined to fight this”.
The dossier, which was said to contain 40 allegedly vague allegations, bemoaned “a lack of psychological safety, i.e. the fear of who will be attacked next” and staff were “worried that the commission is becoming an unsafe place to work”. Another was said to have taken issue with someone rolling their eyes.
Another alleged that Baroness Falkner described Emma Laslett, a trans quiz contestant was at the centre of a BBC Radio 4 row for being included in an “all-women final”, as a “bloke in lipstick” which prompted the EHRC’s chief executive, Marcial Boo, to allegedly “rebuke” her in front of 21 other board members, though this was dismissed as “pretty trivial” by a source who said she was condemning abuse of trans people.
Trans fury at EHRC’s drive to defend women
The events coincide with the EHRC’s attempt to defend gender-critical views in the transgender debate since Lady Falkner took charge, which has infuriated trans activists.
This included Lady Falkner advising ministers earlier this year to update the definition of “sex” in the 2010 Equality Act to make clear that it refers to biological sex, not any self-ascribed identity.
Baroness Falkner said in a statement that she had “every confidence in being exonerated” and has neither been interviewed nor had any formal employment complaints filed against her, and was “presenting a detailed rebuttal”.
Multiple EHRC insiders had raised concerns internally about the investigation being “prejudiced” and “compromised” by leaks to Left-wing journalists, The Telegraph understands, with some believing that it was impossible for Lady Falkner to get a fair hearing.
On Thursday, 54 peers wrote to Ofcom, the broadcasting regulator, to “condemn in the strongest terms” a report into the furore by Channel 4 News earlier this week which saw 20 current and former disgruntled staff make “emotive, one-sided and unsubstantiated” anonymous claims about the EHRC’s chair and expert commissioners.
The peers said there was no mention of “the immense amount of abuse Baroness Falkner has been subjected to, both on social media and in real life” in the report, and accused the broadcaster of being “complicit” in attempts by a “small group of staff” to “undermine…Baroness Falkner [who] has an outstanding personal record opposing discrimination and prejudice of all kinds”.
Earlier this month, masked trans activists placed bottles of urine outside the EHRC offices in Westminster, which reportedly led to police erecting a cordon and carrying out a controlled explosion.
I guess that’s as good a reason as any to just switch off for the weekend.
So despite Falkner abusing her position to push her personal GC views on the population and back the impending Tory reforms to the EA to upend the lives of trans people and significantly roll back our rights, in spite of:
* The original intent of the EA
* The guidance issued with the EA
* Over a decade of case law testing the EA
* Legal cases the EHRC have even gone to court to defend
the EHRC is going along with the idea that the EA has always meant that trans exclusion is the default, and pretending there is absolutely nothing actually changing. And when the staff at the EHRC file complaints and point out just how dishonest and disingenuous that Falkner and the commissioners are being, it’s handwaved as a meritless coup?
What a cruel joke.
—
I’m angry enough to waste the time on breaking down this article further.
>The EHRC had appointed Gavin Mansfield KC, an employment barrister, to conduct the probe at a cost to taxpayers of £100,000, while Baroness Falkner, who has been in charge since 2020, was having to pay tens of thousands of pounds for lawyers to defend herself.
For the Telegraph to lament the costs to the taxpayer while it is happy to spend however much it’ll cost for the EHRC to produce their analysis and consult on the EA reforms, and Parliament to debate and pass the reforms, as well as the fact that such time could be spent on measures that actually make a positive difference, is comical.
The personal costs to Falkner are another matter, and while she is a Baroness substantial legal costs aren’t something to wish on anyone.
>Now, the investigation into the complaints has been suspended, hours after 54 cross-party peers including Lord Frost, Baron Roberts and Baroness Jenkin backed the EHRC chief, saying she had been “irresponsibly attacked”.
Criticism of her in a professional capacity is absolutely justified, and we aren’t even privy to how meritless complaints about her conduct are.
>The complaints made by the civil servants were dismissed as “ideological”, “vexatious” and a “political chess game” by the equality chief’s allies, who said she was “determined to fight this”.
“In our opinion, we’ve done nothing wrong and that’s what matters”.
>This included Lady Falkner advising ministers earlier this year to update the definition of “sex” in the 2010 Equality Act to make clear that it refers to biological sex, not any self-ascribed identity.
Glossing over the substance of the matter significantly. I’m genuinely livid that so much of the media is committed to, for lack of a better word, gaslight trans people over what the reforms do and how sweeping the upset to trans people’s lives will be.
Literally today an example of using the current EA to exclude trans women from a women’s space is in the headlines, and there have been countless examples of similar actions being done lawfully. There’s a reason the initial government response to the petition that started this was that the EA is already clear and that trans exclusion can be lawful. There is guidance, there is case law (some of which the EHRC has been directly involved in), there is no good faith way to say that things are currently inadequate.
Instead, and emphasised by aspects of Falkner’s response, the proposed change to the EA would see exclusion of trans people as the default. The most significant aspect of the changes, and even highlighted by Falker, are the Schedule 3 Part 7 exemptions that allow for the lawful exclusion of trans people when it comes to sex discrimination. These exemptions are what are currently used to exclude trans women from women’s spaces/services where necessary and justifiable, but these would change to be about the exclusion of trans men from women’s spaces/services. Never mind that that’s completely abhorrent to keep on the books, if the point of this change is to force trans men out of men’s spaces and trans women out of women’s spaces, turning around and allowing for wholesale denial of access because they have no other option is fucking barbaric. Literally the only silver lining there is it sounds like it’ll be a monumental bar to clear to justify such exclusion as proportionate. Additionally, provisions such as the Public Sector Equality Duty would require the exclusion of trans people in a manner that directly contrasts the status quo for entities in the public sector, i.e. NHS hospitals would be not be able to but trans women on women’s wards, schools would not be able to accommodate trans pupils, etc.
I know that other trans people have fixated on matters such as her calling a trans woman a man in lipstick, and finger wagging about how bad that is, but it’s missing the forest for the trees that someone with GC views has decided to come in and abuse her position as the head of the equalities quango, rig it against trans people and give a big thumbs up to the government taking an axe to the rights of trans people. It is disgusting and abhorrent and in any sane or just world, she’d be gone. Who cares what rude things she says, she has corrupted the EHRC with her own bigotry and is committing gross dereliction of her duty.
>On Thursday, 54 peers wrote to Ofcom, the broadcasting regulator, to “condemn in the strongest terms” a report into the furore by Channel 4 News earlier this week which saw 20 current and former disgruntled staff make “emotive, one-sided and unsubstantiated” anonymous claims about the EHRC’s chair and expert commissioners.
Not strictly related, but obligatory “abolish the HoL”. That said, cry me a fucking river, with how the media has behaved to trans people these past few years. It must be so hard to hear any pushback as someone who is virulently transphobic and abusing her position to try make trans people’s lives hell. Of course, the idea that these are “emotive” TRAs only at the EHRC to sabotage the fine, upstanding Baroness, and not people who would have gotten involved in the EHRC because they wanted to make a positive difference who are repulsed at what the EHRC has become sure is questionable at best.
Fuck this.
Typical Torygraph using TERF dogwhistles in their article. “Trans activists” is straight up a phrase used to belittle, dehumanise and make fun of trans rights campaigners. It’s sick.
The victim in this case claims Baroness Falkner, head of the EHRC, referred to her as “a bloke in lipstick”.
Mark Jenkinson, sitting member of parliaments Women and Equalities Select Committee, responded to this story by tweeting her photo and saying:
“I can’t even see the lipstick 💄”
The case has been dropped.
When you are trans and you complain about being bullied at work, you get further insulted and laughed at by an MP with an equalities remit and the case get dropped. This is Terf Island
The problem with transphobes’ tactics – like making a huge scene whenever they are called out – is that they work.
They work because their power to intimidate is only too apparent.
Their talk of conspiracies and ‘the blob’ is projection, of course.
But this lets some seriously awful people off the hook, and allow them to carry on with their own agenda.
Let’s not forget that this is an independent investigation that’s just been suspended.