Green Party expels ex-health spokesperson after LGBTQ+ comment row
The Green Party of England and Wales has expelled its former health spokesperson eight months after an investigation was launched into her comments on LGBTQ+ hate crimes.Documents seen by the BBC show the Greens expelled Dr Pallavi Devulapalli for breaking party rules by attending a party event while under investigation for calling reports of rising LGBTQ+ hate crimes "mischievous".Dr Devulapalli, who has campaigned for the party to change policy on trans people, said the Greens had made "a political move" to silence her and had found a "technicality" to expel her.The Green Party confirmed Dr Devulapalli's expulsion but said it "did not comment on individual cases".
The party has not given any explanation for Dr Devulapalli's suspension or expulsion. But the BBC has obtained internal party documents showing she was expelled for "breaching" the terms of her original suspension by attending a Green Party event while under investigation.Dr Devulapalli, who works as a GP, told the BBC the event was a Christmas party with members of her local Green Party where she had been "invited as a private guest".But the report seen by the BBC found the invite came from a local party coordinator and was sent to supporters and volunteers. The Green Party's disciplinary body decided this made it an official party event.In its ruling, the party said she was being removed to "avoid or reduce the likelihood of further harm to the party".
Dr Devulapalli said finding out she had been expelled from the party she had served for 10 years "felt like I had been literally punched in the gut"."It sucked the breath out of me," told the BBC. Dr Devulapalli said she has "no doubt at all this is a political move".She claimed she was "expelled on a technicality" after years of internally campaigning for the party to treat "sex as a protected characteristic".The party's rights and responsibilities policy states "trans men are men, trans women are women, and that non-binary identities exist and are valid".The party also supports making it easier for trans people to be legally recognised in their chosen gender without the need for a Gender Reassignment Certificate (GRC), which Dr Devulapalli has called a "mistake".
Green Party documents show Dr Devulapalli was originally placed on an emergency suspension pending a code of conduct investigation last September.The councillor, who sits on West Norfolk Council, was at the time one of the Green's most high-profile figures and stood for the party at last year's general election in South West Norfolk, against former Conservative Prime Minister Liz Truss.During the election she spoke at a hustings event hosted by Friends of the Earth, where she was asked to respond to reports on rising LGBTQ+ hate crime, as well as her opinion on single-sex spaces and where the Green party stood on that issue. She told the meeting: "I've yet to meet anyone that actually says somebody should not have the right to be addressed as they please, and to dress as they please."I really think there is something mischievous in the air - to make those out to be an issue."Following the hustings Dr Devulapalli clarified her comments, telling the BBC "there is no trans-hate in society in general".She said her remarks reflected her view that hate crime against LGBTQ+ people was "being politicised" and "most people weren't aware of the issue".She said she condemned anti-LGBTQ+ hate crimes.Government data show 4,732 hate crimes against trans people in the year before Dr Devulapalli's comments, up from 4,262 the previous year. Hate crimes against gay, lesbian and bisexual people have fallen 6% over the same period to 25,639.
Sign up for our Politics Essential newsletter to keep up with the inner workings of Westminster and beyond.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
14 minutes ago
- BBC News
Asylum sites to be expanded as ministers bid to end hotel use
Large asylum seeker sites like Wethersfield air base in Essex are set to be expanded under plans to end the use of asylum hotels, the BBC can Rachel Reeves pledged to stop using taxpayer-funded hotels by 2029 in her Spending Review, saying this would save £ of the ways the Home Office hopes to achieve this is by moving asylum seekers from hotels into cheaper alternative forms of Keir Starmer pledged to close the Wethersfield asylum facility during last year's election campaign, but the BBC understands that site and another in Huddersfield are among those under consideration for extensions. A Home Office spokesperson said the government was "making strong strides to deliver a more sustainable and cost-effective asylum accommodation system"."This includes ending the use of hotels, testing new locally-led models, and working closely with local authorities and other departments to ensure a fairer, more efficient approach," they added."Our use of any property or Home Office-owned site will be used in line with the permissions set by planning permissions."The taxpayer cost of asylum hotels has rocketed in recent years, with total accommodation contracts now set to be worth £15.3bn over a 10-year while extending large sites might be cheaper, the move is likely to anger local residents and refugee rights April last year, Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said the Wethersfield site couldn't be "seen as either a sustainable solution for housing asylum seekers nor value for money for the taxpayer".Conservative MP Sir James Cleverly, whose Braintree constituency includes Wethersfield, said the existing cap on the number of people living at the facility "was there to protect the safety and security" of constituents, and "those working at and living on the site".Sir James, who became home secretary shortly after the first asylum seekers moved into Wethersfield, said the government plan to potentially expand the site was "disgraceful and shows just how out of touch they are with the concerns of local communities".In March, the High Court found the previous Conservative government's use of Wethersfield to house asylum seekers was unlawful, after three men argued they were living in "prison-like" former RAF base has been housing asylum seekers since 2023. It has a current capacity of 800, but is thought to house closer to 500 people at Home Office contract for the base is held by Clearsprings, whose founder Graham King recently became a billionaire, according to the Sunday Times rich Helen Bamber Foundation, a human rights groups, has previously said that accommodating people at the base causes harm to their physical and mental Dorling, the group's director of policy, told the BBC that Wethersfield "should be closed immediately, not extended".She said: "Housing people, including survivors of torture and trafficking, in an isolated, overcrowded camp reminiscent of an open-air prison, with inadequate healthcare and legal services, is an inhumane way to treat those seeking protection." Savings target A pair of former student accommodation blocks in Huddersfield, acquired by the Home Office last year, could also be buildings, constructed in 2019, have a current capacity of 650 but have never been occupied because of safety extensions to asylum seeker accommodation would be paid for using money earmarked for investment from the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, meaning it could be borrowed without falling foul of the chancellor's strict spending Office figures released last month show that as of March, there were about 100,000 asylum seekers in government-funded accommodation, with about 32,000 of those in hopes to end the use of hotels by reducing small boat crossings, speeding up the asylum application process and moving people into alternative the chancellor's Spending Review, there had been some confusion over what that alternative accommodation might secretary to the Treasury Darren Jones told BBC Newsnight the government would be "upgrading current facilities, which will include some extensions".But on Thursday, the prime minister's official spokesman refused to comment on whether new accommodation would be built.A senior Home Office source has now confirmed to the BBC that while there were no plans for entirely new accommodation blocks, extensions of current facilities will be built and other existing accommodation such as unused student blocks will be £1bn saving which the chancellor said would come from reducing hotel use has already been taken out of the Home Office Home Office has a new target for how much additional asylum accommodation needs to be created to help achieve the saving, but that exact figure is BBC understands that moving around 14,000 asylum seekers from hotels into other forms of accommodation would likely achieve a saving of £1bn.A senior Home Office source said they were "confident" they could save the required money, but acknowledged that failing to hit the target would force the department to ask Reeves for more funding to avoid having to make cuts number of asylum seekers in hotels is far lower than the record figure in 2023, but has increased since Labour came to power last latest statistics go up to March and therefore don't take into account the knock-on effect of increased small boat crossings in the months since.
Sky News
18 minutes ago
- Sky News
Chancellor dismisses 'hurt feelings' after PM's U-turn on grooming gangs inquiry
The chancellor has refused to say if the government will apologise for dismissing calls for a national public inquiry into grooming gangs after the prime minister U-turned on the matter last night. Rachel Reeves told Sky News Sir Keir Starmer changed his mind after a government-requested audit into the scale of grooming gangs across the country concluded a nationwide probe was necessary. But she said the most important thing is to focus on the victims, not the "hurt feelings" of how others may have been spoken about. Speaking to Sky's Sunday Morning With Trevor Phillips, Ms Reeves said one of the reasons the prime minister changed his mind on the need for a statutory public inquiry is to ensure that "people are compelled to give evidence", which local inquiries do not have the power to do. The chancellor was then asked if there will be an apology to people who were criticised by ministers for "talking total nonsense", spreading "misinformation", and were accused of jumping on an extremist "bandwagon". She replied: "What is the most important thing here? It is the victims, and it's not people's hurt feelings about how they have been spoken about." 3:31 What has the PM previously said? The prime minister has been sharply criticised for his comments about people calling for a statutory public inquiry. He said on 6 January: "What I won't tolerate is this discussion and debate based on lies without calling it out. What I won't tolerate is politicians jumping on the bandwagon simply to get attention. "When those politicians sat in government for 14 long years tweeting, talking, but not doing anything about [it]. Now, so desperate for attention that they're amplifying what the far right is saying." But Ms Reeves defended the prime minister's handling of the issue, saying he pledged to implement all 20 recommendations from the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA), criminal convictions are now at "a record high", and that he brought the first convictions for grooming when he served as director of public prosecutions. 3:31 Sir Keir confirmed last night that he will now be ordering a full statutory inquiry into the grooming gangs scandal. The full report from Baroness Louise Casey is set to be published on Monday, and the home secretary is expected to make a statement to parliament. He told reporters travelling with him to the G7 summit in Canada: "[Baroness Casey's] position when she started the audit was that there was not a real need for a national inquiry over and above what was going on. "She has looked at the material... and she has come to the view that there should be a national inquiry on the basis of what she has seen. I have read every single word of her report, and I am going to accept her recommendation. That is the right thing to do on the basis of what she has put in her audit. "I asked her to do that job to double check on this; she has done that job for me, and having read her report... I shall now implement her recommendations." What will the report say? The near 200-page report is to be published next week and is expected to warn that white British girls were "institutionally ignored for fear of racism". One person familiar with the report said it details the institutional failures in treating young girls and cites a decade of lost action from the IICSA, set up in 2014 to investigate grooming gangs in Rotherham. The report is also expected to link illegal immigration with the exploitation of young girls. The grooming gang scandal came back into the headlines at the beginning of the year after Elon Musk attacked Sir Keir and safeguarding minister Jess Philips for failing children. The prime minister and Ms Phillips hit back, with Sir Keir citing his record of prosecuting abusers as director of public prosecutions, while Ms Phillips has long been a campaigner against domestic violence.
Telegraph
31 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Rachel Reeves's tax dilemma is about to get ugly
For close watchers of Britain's economy, last week was dominated by the Government's spending review, stuffed full of numbers of dubious validity, and the political theatre surrounding its delivery in the House of Commons. The event had about it a distinct air of unreality. We all know that the real event will be the budget in Autumn, when the Rachel Reeves will have to confront whatever depressing new economic and financial forecasts are given to her by the Office for Budget Responsibility and to grapple with the horrible reality of surging public debt. Of course, she could react by redefining her fiscal rules to allow more borrowing. After all, this is a well-trodden path. But if she wishes to maintain a shred of fiscal credibility, she will be forced to announce spending cuts or tax increases – or both. Bearing in mind the politics within the Labour Party and public opinion in the country, we are expecting higher taxes. And it is going to be ugly. At least last week the Chancellor could take comfort from the fact that the financial markets were, as expected, unfazed by the spending review. This does not imply that they are unworried by the huge amount of public debt. Quite the opposite. It is simply that there was nothing in the review that was surprising. They know that the big questions about the economy and fiscal policy remain exactly the same as they were beforehand.
