Gay railway station volunteer banned over gender-critical views
A gay volunteer was banned from a railway group after expressing his gender-critical views on email and social media.
Matthew Toomer, 48, was thrown out of West Midlands Railway's 'Adopt a Station' scheme after he privately contacted company bosses to express concern about its 'Progress Pride' train.
WMR rebranded one of its trains last summer with a 'rainbow diamond motif' that bares similarities to the Progress Pride flag, which features a yellow diamond. It was also named 'Hurst Street' after the Birmingham road at the centre of the city's Gay Village.
Mr Toomer commented on a social media post about the rebranded train, asking if it would 'return to its natural state once the event is over'.
In response, he was summoned to a meeting and told that his views 'do not align with [WMR's] values and mission'. He was banned from the Redditch station volunteer group.
Mr Toomer said: 'As a gay man myself, I want to stress that this wasn't about objecting to visibility. My concern was the increasing tendency of public transport organisations to take visible positions on divisive issues.
'The Progress Pride flag has become associated with particular ideological stances – particularly around gender – which not everyone, including many within the LGB community, fully endorse.
'My position was simply that public services should remain neutral and welcoming to everyone.'
The Free Speech Union (FSU), which represents the volunteer, has written to the rail operator to warn it that punishing Mr Toomer in this way 'unjustifiably restricts his freedom of expression, and that it is contrary to WMR's stated values of diversity, equality and inclusion'.
Rebekah Brown, a case officer at the FSU, called on the train company to 'apologise for this vindictive decision and reinstate him'.
Instead a spokesman claimed to The Telegraph that Mr Toomer's social media activity in general 'felt problematic'.
The WMR spokesman said: 'Our company has a proud culture of inclusion and allyship.
'We believe the views Mr Toomer has expressed on social media on a range of subjects are at odds with these values and could be harmful or offensive to our colleagues, customers or other volunteers.
'We have therefore asked that Mr Toomer no longer volunteers on behalf of West Midlands Railway.'
When asked to point out examples of allegedly 'problematic' posts by Mr Toomer, the spokesman failed to do so.
'Majority of WMR customers will agree with Mr Toomer'
Ms Brown, the FSU case officer, said: 'WMR should focus on delivering a working service for their passengers, not compelling every volunteer to be a fellow traveller for corporate wokery.
'I expect the vast majority of West Midland's Railway's customers will agree with Mr Toomer, not with WMR's enforced ideological orthodoxy.
'A train company has no business acting as the arbiter of permissible opinion for volunteers, with these chilling consequences for individuals' freedom of speech in their daily lives.'
Train companies' efforts to align themselves with political ideologies have caused a number of controversies.
Last year Government-owned LNER prompted outrage after a senior manager trawled through a passenger's social media account to find material to justify refusing to answer her questions about the cost of a similar Pride train rebrand.
Similarly, Avanti West Coast triggered a row after a racial diversity-themed 'wrapping' of one of its trains.
Unlike the well-known rainbow Gay Pride flag, the Progress Pride flag is associated with the pro-transgender political movement.
This campaigns for the view that men who wish to call themselves women – that is, changing their gender to become trans women – must be treated as if they had been born female.
This political stance was dealt a fatal blow by the Supreme Court a few weeks ago when the country's most senior judges ruled that such trans women are not women, and are therefore not allowed to use women's facilities such as public toilets and changing rooms.
Securing lawful access to such areas is a key focus of pro-transgender campaigners and lobbyists.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
26 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Rachel Reeves only has herself to blame for this recession
Companies were hammered by a steep rise in employment taxes. Business rates went up sharply as reliefs were wound down. The living wage was pushed up, and stamp duty breaks were slashed. Against that dismal backdrop, it is probably a miracle that the GDP figures for April published today recorded only a 0.3 per cent month-on-month decline in output. The Chancellor Rachel Reeves will shamelessly try to blame that on the tariff war started by president Trump. But the blunt truth is this. The unfolding recession was entirely predictable – and she has only herself to blame. April was always going to be a tough month for anyone struggling to run a business in the UK. Employer National Insurance went up, and we saw the initial impact of that in the annual loss of 274,000 jobs in the employment data reported earlier this week. Likewise, one of the biggest rises in the living wage was imposed, and we saw the effect of that in declining hours worked in sectors such as shops and restaurants, which need lots of modestly paid staff. Business rates went up sharply, as reliefs were wound down, with many pubs facing an extra £12,000 or more in the amount that they have to pay to the local council, and closures are now running at 100 a month. Stamp duty went up as reliefs were phased out, and we have already seen the consequences of that in the 0.4 per cent decline in home prices reported by Halifax last week. In the background, industrial electricity prices have remained by far the highest in the world, forcing factories to close their doors. One by one Reeves has taken the major sectors of the British economy – property, hospitality, retailing and manufacturing – and whacked them with huge extra charges. Sure, it didn't help that the US imposed tariffs on the UK along with its other major trading partners. And yet, in reality, the sharp fall in output witnessed in April was entirely self-imposed. It took an extraordinary level of incompetence, and a breath-taking level of arrogance, to sequence such a punishing round of tax increases so that they all kicked in at the same time. It is not as if Reeves was not warned of the devastating impact of her tax rises on businesses. The M&S boss Stuart Machin called for the NI rise to be phased in back in February but was ignored. The British Beer and Pub Association called for help with business rates, but no one at the Treasury paid any attention. Rightmove called for stamp duty relief to be extended, and so did many other estate agents, but the Government didn't listen. The list goes on and on. Time and time again, businesses have told the Chancellor that her policies are killing their trade, only to be ignored. As it has turned out, however, they were completely right, and today's GDP figures have proved that. It is going to get much worse over the next few months. We have only seen the start of the fall in employment after the NI rise. After all, if your wage bill is out of control, it takes time to slim staff numbers. There are procedures to follow before you dismiss someone, and most small companies will rely on natural wastage, and simply not replace people, instead of risking the cost of an employment tribunal. Stamp duty has only just gone up, and it will take buyers a while to figure out they can no longer afford to move. Meanwhile, retail sales are falling again, and the inevitability of more tax rises on business in the autumn is deterring investment. Reeves chose to ignore the warnings that her tax raids would crash the economy. She will now have to reap the consequences of those decisions – and unfortunately so will the rest of us.
Telegraph
26 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Reeves dismisses Khan in row over police funding
Rachel Reeves has rejected claims made by Sir Sadiq Khan that her spending review will result in the number of police officers being cut. In her spending review on Wednesday the Chancellor announced a 2.3 per cent real-terms increase in police spending power. But the National Police Chiefs' Council (NPCC) said the funding settlement 'falls far short of what is required to fund the Government's ambitions and maintain our existing workforce'. Sir Sadiq, the Mayor of London, said he was concerned the spending review 'could result in insufficient funding for the [Metropolitan Police] and fewer police officers'. Asked if Sir Sadiq was wrong, the Chancellor told the BBC Radio 4 Today programme: 'I really don't accept that there needs to be cuts when we are actually increasing the money that the police force gets.' Told about the NPCC's warning, Ms Reeves said: 'The police have been allocated a budget which has a real-terms increase of 2.3 per cent a year and they now need to live within those budgets.' Making 'sums add up' Ms Reeves said the police were getting a 'substantial' increase in spending power. She told BBC Breakfast: 'That [2.3 per cent] is a substantial increase and that is for every year of this spending review period, so for the next three years. 'So there is no reason for those numbers to decline. The spending power of police is going up substantially and the spending that we set out yesterday was an average across all parts of government of 2.3 per cent a year, and so policing are in line with that average across other government departments. 'But look, I wasn't able to say yes to everything that people asked for in the spending review. People always are going to want more whether it is in health, education, defence or indeed for policing. 'But my job as Chancellor is to make sure that the sums add up and we can't spend more than we have coming in.' Senior officers have warned that a lack of funds will put at risk Labour's promises to deploy an extra 13,000 neighbourhood police officers, as well as their pledge to halve violence against women and girls and reduce knife crime. The extra funding for the police is expected to amount to just £200 million in real-terms by the end of the decade.
The Independent
28 minutes ago
- The Independent
Australia's defense minister downplays concerns over Pentagon review of multi-billion submarine deal
Australia 's defense minister dismissed concerns Thursday that a deal between the U.S., Australia and Britain to provide his country with nuclear-powered submarines could be in jeopardy, following a report that the Pentagon had ordered a review. Australian Defense Minister Richard Marles told Sky News Australia that he had known about the review of the deal 'for some time," saying that it was a 'very natural step for the incoming administration to take.' He noted that the UK's government also reviewed the deal, the centerpiece of a three-way alliance known as AUKUS after it was elected, and that his own government had looked at it as part of its own review of Australia's entire defense posture. "I think an incoming government having a look at this is something that they have a perfect right to do and we welcome it and we'll work with it,' he said. The deal, worth more than $200 billion, was signed between the three countries in 2021 under then President Joe Biden, designed to provide Australia, one of Washington's staunchest allies in the region, with greater maritime capabilities to counter China's increasingly strong navy. The deal also involves the U.S. selling several of its Virginia-class submarines to Australia to bridge the gap as the new submarines are being jointly built. In January, Australia made the first of six $500 million payments to the U.S. under the AUKUS deal, meant to bolster American submarine manufacturing. Marles met with U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on the sidelines of a defense conference in Singapore less than two weeks ago, and told reporters afterward that he had come away with 'a sense of confidence about the way in which AUKUS is proceeding.' 'AUKUS is on track and we are meeting all the timelines that are associated with it,' he said. 'We are very optimistic.' Hegseth's address to the defense forum made multiple mentions of cooperation with Australia but no reference to AUKUS, however, though he did later mention the deal when he was taking questions. Hegseth did urge allies in the Indo-Pacific to increase their defense spending, and underscored the need for a 'strong, resolute and capable network of allies and partners' as the U.S. seeks to counter China.
