
As Labour targets trans rights, Scotland can do better
And – more depressingly – was all that progress so fragile, so insubstantial, that nearly four decades later, instead of celebrating a new Labour Government as champions of LGBT+ rights, we must fear them?
Fear has been the overriding emotion since the General Election last year, when the least right-wing contender for Prime Minister made flip-flopping on trans rights into an Olympic sport (it must be his biological advantage that allows him to excel in that, I suppose).
Since Labour took office, those fears have proven well-founded.
READ MORE: Uniformed police pulled from Glasgow Pride over 'impartiality' concerns
From pushing full steam ahead with the Tories' efforts to strip back trans healthcare, to Keir Starmer's statements about trans people's right to access services based on their gender identity, it quickly became clear that any dream of a reprieve from regression would remain just that.
And now, 25 years after the Labour/LibDem coalition at Holyrood repealed Clause 2A – which barred teachers from 'promoting' homosexuality in schools – and 22 years after Tony Blair's Labour government followed suit for England and Wales, Starmer's Labour have effectively introduced the same approach for transgender identity.
In new statutory guidance published last week by the UK Government on sex and relationships education, teachers in England are told that, while they should teach about the legally protected characteristic of gender reassignment, they should avoid using materials which 'encourage pupils to question their gender'.
That such a statement can be included in official guidance underlines that the same old unfounded fears about gay people are now being rehashed for our trans siblings.
The premise at the heart of this directive is that a child or young person can be encouraged to be transgender, just like Section 28 implied an inherent risk of homosexuality being 'promoted' to children. Welcome to the Gender Agenda, just like the Gay Agenda, except Labour and the Tories are united over it.
Let's just be clear: these are not ideas that any progressive political party should be endorsing, never mind mandating. Labour knew this 40 years ago when it came to gay people. They certainly knew it after watching the harm that Margaret Thatcher's government caused to both young people and teachers by introducing a policy predicated on these falsehoods.
So how can this same party – insofar as it is the same party – wilfully do the same to trans people now?
In the same section, schools are told to avoid materials that 'could be interpreted as being aimed at younger children', and to 'consult parents on the content of external resources on this topic in advance'. As with other aspects of sex and relationships education, parents have the right to withdraw children from lessons.
This part is familiar, not because it harks back to decades past – although it might – but because this is also the policy regarding sex education here in Scotland.
Of course, Scotland has also introduced LGBT+-inclusive education across the curriculum, so it should not be possible to prevent a child from learning about trans or queer people at all. However, the assumption behind this parental rights approach is worth examining because it has taken centre stage in recent debates – and Scotland is far from immune.
Amidst the moral outrage and proliferation in conspiracy theories of recent years about the supposedly shocking materials children are being exposed to in schools, the number of parents in Scotland withdrawing their kids from sex ed has quadrupled in the last five years.
When those figures were reported in April, the Tories commented in support of parents' right to pull kids from these lessons, while Alba's deputy leader Neale Hanvey blamed the Scottish Government's 'gender policy difficulties' and its 2021 schools' 'sex survey' for the spike.
But why should we accept that parents have an absolute right to control what their children learn? There are many subjects on which we simply wouldn't accept that. For example, if a parent believes the Earth is flat, should they have a right to pull their children out of classes that teach otherwise?
It's one thing when a handful of children are withdrawn from lessons for religious reasons – although I would also quibble with that – but when media-confected hysteria is driving these numbers through the roof, it might be time to look again at who we are allowing to dictate the next generation's access to knowledge, and why.
Although there's not much chance of that in England, where the Government's own guidance is being written to appease the fearmongers.
Within the document, schools are instructed not to 'teach as fact that all people have a gender identity', and to instead be mindful that there is 'significant debate' around this and 'be careful not to endorse any particular view'.
Only 15 years from the introduction of the Equality Act – by the last Labour Government – and it's now Labour policy that, unlike the other protected characteristics, there is so much debate around trans people that teachers should present 'for and against' arguments about them to children.
Coming just months after the Supreme Court ruling on the meaning of 'sex' in the Equality Act, and the various and bizarre extrapolations which have ensued from that, this shouldn't be surprising.
When Starmer wouldn't commit during his election campaign to trans-inclusive policies, or to just about anything, his Government was hardly going to seek to upset the trans-exclusionary crowd now when support for his party is tanking.
This is what's most frightening about the Labour leadership. About a lot of political leaders, when push comes to shove. It's not that they're driven by a deeply held belief that any of this is going to make life better for women, girls, children. Nor is it that they're fuelled by a hatred of trans people.
Don't get me wrong, some of them are surely transphobic. The ease with which they've transitioned, if you will, from the role of rainbow-splashed allies to vanguards of the assault on trans people's legal rights alludes to underlying prejudices shaken free of pretence.
READ MORE: Our youth orchestra shows the power of children's rights in action
Above all, though, all of the political posturing – the capitulating and contorting, the derailing and distorting – that has come to define this Labour Government's approach (and one day, its legacy) on this issue can be condensed and explained by one word: power.
When the tides turn, this Labour Party will do the only thing that those intent upon power and preserving their own self-interest above all else will ever do – grab a surfboard and ride the fucking wave. And rest assured, if they can do that now, about this issue, they'll do it again about the next thing, and the next thing.
But here's the catch: when it comes to vilifying and ostracising marginalised people, there is no sweet spot that unscrupulous politicians can hit to satisfy the agitators. A case in point: so-called 'gender critical' campaigners are still angry about the Labour education guidance because it doesn't go far enough.
This should be a lesson to the Scottish Government, present and future, while it contends with considerable pressures from those who'd like to see it turn its back on trans people. It's also a lesson they might reflect on when deciding whether to progress with legislation which is bound to be met with similar backlash.
You can't control the fires of hate by adding just enough fuel, or by ignoring it – you can only fight it head-on.
Rhoda Meek returns next week
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Belfast Telegraph
21 minutes ago
- Belfast Telegraph
If 16-year-olds are to be able to vote, then political education should begin at 11
I've grown up in a very political household. The ins and outs of Northern Ireland politics are discussed every day at home, as well as the genocide in Gaza and the war in Ukraine. I'm doing A-level politics and I've been lucky enough to meet the leaders of all our local parties. I joined them on the campaign trail with my mum during last year's General Election, or met them in TV studios.


Daily Mirror
22 minutes ago
- Daily Mirror
Major pensions review launched - what it means for your retirement savings
Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall will revive the Pensions Commission, which last met in 2006, to look at ways to encourage workers to save more money for their retirement A major review into pension saving has been announced by Labour amid fears that today's workers face a greater risk of poverty in retirement. Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall will revive the Pensions Commission, which last met in 2006, to look at ways to encourage workers to save more money for their retirement. Experts have today warned that people looking to retire in 2050 are on course to receive £800 per year less than current pensioners. Analysis from the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) also reveals 15 million people were undersaving for retirement, while 45% of working-age adults were not saving into a pension at all. Around three million self-employed people are said to be saving nothing for their retirement, while only a quarter of people on low pay in the private sector and the same proportion from Pakistani or Bangladeshi backgrounds are saving. The Pensions Commission previously recommended automatically enrolling people in workplace pensions, which has seen the number of eligible employees saving rise from 55% in 2012 to 88%. Pensions minister Torsten Bell said: 'The original Pensions Commission helped get pension saving up and pensioner poverty down. But if we carry on as we are, tomorrow's retirees risk being poorer than today's. So we are reviving the Pensions Commission to finish the job and give today's workers secure retirements to look forward to.' Chancellor Rachel Reeves added: "We're making pensions work for Britain. The Pension Schemes Bill and the creation of pension megafunds mean an average earner could get a £29,000 boost to their pension pots. Now we are going further to ensure that people can look forward to a comfortable retirement.' What does it mean for your pension? The most common type of workplace pension scheme is called defined contribution (DC). This is where savers make regular contributions into a pension scheme, and the size of your pot by retirement depends on how much you've saved, and the growth of your investment. The review will look into whether workers who are part of a DC scheme are saving enough money for retirement. There is another type of pension scheme called defined benefit (DB) which is where you are guaranteed a specific income for life when you reach retirement, based on your salary and years of service. The review will also look into the state pension, which is separate to any private pension you may have. For men and women, the state pension age is currently 66 - but this is set to rise to 67 between 2026 and 2028. A further increase to 68 is due to happen between 2044 and 2046. There previously have been calls for this to be brought forward, but a decision on this has been delayed. The State Pension Age review, which is required by law, will report back by March 2029. The state pension rises every year in line with the triple lock. The triple lock ensures the state pension rises every April in line with either inflation, wage increases or 2.5% - whichever is the highest. The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) recently warned the annual cost of the triple lock policy is estimated to reach £15.5billion by 2030. What does the pensions industry think? Kate Smith, head of pensions at Aegon, said: 'To really move the pension dial, we are calling for the new Pension Commission to make bold, brave and possibly unpalatable recommendations to the Government, such as implementing significant increases to auto-enrolment contributions during the next parliament for those on mid and higher incomes. 'We're pleased the Pension Commission will investigate pension inequalities for key groups such as women, the self-employed and ethnic minorities, which will mean more people will save into a pension. 'Currently too many people are excluded from auto-enrolment as they don't meet the current criteria – they're too young, too old, self-employed or don't earn enough. This includes those with multiple low paid jobs, who are mainly women.' Caroline Abrahams, charity director at Age UK, said: 'If we're to avoid future generations of pensioners experiencing financial hardship, we need reforms that enable more people to build a decent standard of living, and we need them sooner rather than later to maximise the numbers who can be helped. 'Income for pensioners in the UK is based around both State and private pensions working together to help people enjoy a decent lifestyle once retired. The current system of saving has some significant gaps which have left many current pensioners struggling to make ends meet.

Western Telegraph
33 minutes ago
- Western Telegraph
Senedd cross-party support for backbench sign language bill
Mark Isherwood formally introduced his British Sign Language (BSL) bill in the Senedd on July 16, nearly seven years after calls were first made for legislation in Wales. Mr Isherwood, a disability rights campaigner for decades, explained the bill would introduce legal requirements to promote and facilitate the use of BSL in Wales. He warned: 'Too often, deaf people are unable to access vital public services because they cannot communicate in their first language. 'This denies them their rights and places them at a significant disadvantage – whether in health care, education, employment, transport or otherwise." He told the Senedd: 'BSL plays a crucial role in enabling communication and promoting inclusivity in everyday life – for many deaf individuals, BSL is their primary language. 'Deaf BSL signers in Wales cannot access services in their first language and this is unacceptable. As one individual undergoing major surgery shared 'throughout the whole time, I did not understand anything'.' He added: 'If passed, therefore, this will be the most progressive BSL law in the UK.' Jane Hutt welcomed and supported the bill on behalf of the Welsh Government, which recognised BSL as a language more than 20 years ago in 2004. Wales' social justice secretary, who has worked with Mr Isherwood on developing the proposed legislation, described the bill as a step towards lasting change. The backbench bill would be the first passed by the Senedd in a decade, with bills on mental health, food, education, autism and older people's rights rejected or withdrawn in that time. Concerns have been raised about the Senedd's capacity for legislation brought forward by backbench members who are not a part of the Welsh Government. The BSL bill, as an example, was accompanied by a 113-page explanation and impact assessment. If passed, it would be a first since Liberal Democrat Kirsty Williams introduced a bill on safe nurse staffing levels in 2014, which became law two years later. Labour's Jenny Rathbone chairs the Senedd's equality committee, which she said had 'cleared the decks' to focus on seeing the BSL bill become an Act by May 2026.