logo
As Labour targets trans rights, Scotland can do better

As Labour targets trans rights, Scotland can do better

The National20-07-2025
Some 38 years on and some other questions spring to mind. Firstly, were Labour really that fun in the 1980s? I wish I'd known her.
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And now, 25 years after the Labour/­LibDem coalition at Holyrood repealed Clause 2A – which barred ­teachers from 'promoting' ­homosexuality in schools – and 22 years after Tony Blair's Labour government followed suit for England and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
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

I push Keir Starmer to be more extroverted in Scotland
I push Keir Starmer to be more extroverted in Scotland

Leader Live

time23 minutes ago

  • Leader Live

I push Keir Starmer to be more extroverted in Scotland

Mr Sarwar said he speaks to the Prime Minister every two or three weeks, often calling at weekends when they both have more free time. The Scottish Labour leader also said he will not engage in any 'back room stitch-ups' with other parties if he becomes first minister following the Scottish election next year. At an Edinburgh Fringe event in front of a live audience, Mr Sarwar was interviewed by Catherine Salmond, editor of The Herald. He was pressed on his relationship with the UK Labour leader and whether Sir Keir was comfortable coming north of the border. He said: 'We're different personalities… I am much more probably conversational, out there, a bit of an extrovert. 'I think it's safe to say he's a bit more introverted in that sense.' Mr Sarwar said Sir Keir had become more relaxed and confident in the five years since becoming Labour leader. He said Sir Keir was more relaxed in Scotland than in other parts of the UK, adding: 'I think we've built up a rapport, probably because I am pushing to be a bit more of extroverted than perhaps he is in other parts.' He said he spoke to the Prime Minister around 'two or three times a month'. However he said the early part of Labour's response to the war in Gaza had been 'challenging' for his party, referring to an interview the Prime Minister gave where he said Israel had the 'right' to withhold power and water from Gaza in response to the October 7 attacks. 'I think the early part was challenging, he himself accepts that what he said in the LBC interview wasn't right,' Mr Sarwar said. Discussing the Middle East further, he said: 'I think we have to be doing much more to hold the Israeli government to account. 'To provide evidence that there is not any components that are being used in a proactive way in Gaza.' Looking ahead to the 2026 Scottish election, Mr Sarwar said he was putting his 'heart, soul energy, time' into winning. He said it would be a 'very close election' likely to result in a 'parliament of minorities'. Rather than doing deals such as the SNP-Green powersharing agreement, he said he would 'work progressively with the parliament' if he became first minister. He said: 'We are looking to form a minority Scottish Labour government that does no kind of back room stich-up but instead moves to govern based on what we promised.'

Keir Starmer urged to drop 'toxic' NIMBY term by Labour MPs
Keir Starmer urged to drop 'toxic' NIMBY term by Labour MPs

Daily Mirror

timean hour ago

  • Daily Mirror

Keir Starmer urged to drop 'toxic' NIMBY term by Labour MPs

In recent months Keir Startmer has vowed to take on 'the NIMBYs' to get spades in the ground of major infastructure projects and deliver on promise to build 1.5million new homes Keir Starmer should drop the "toxic" term NIMBY for those who rally against developments in their own area, a group of Labour MPs have suggested. ‌ In recent months the PM has vowed to take on "the NIMBYs" - an acronym which stands for 'not in my back yard' - to get spades in the ground of major infrastructure projects. But Jenny Riddell-Carpenter, the Labour MP who chairs the Labour Rural Research Group, told The Mirror"many people rightly despise the term". ‌ "The term NIMBY isn't just toxic, it's politically pointless. We win nothing by labelling people 'anti development' or 'anti growth'," she added. It comes after The Mirror's Kevin Maguire wrote: 'Labour must find engaging story for the UK - or face election wipeout'. ‌ The group of 26 Labour backbenchers Labour Rural Research Group - set up to champion rural issues - have published their first report today on the attitudes of their countryside constituents. Their survey of 1,412 people found 56% "firmly do not see themselves as NIMBYs". Over 60% also agreed developments in their areas should go ahead "as long as it is delivered thoughtfully, and with consideration for local needs and identity". The report says: "The rhetoric in today's political world and media, which tends to focus on dividing lines, often pits rural against urban, and NIMBYs (Not In My Back Yard) against YIMBYs (Yes In My Back Yard). YIMBYs are often presented (in the media at least) as proud urban voters, whilst NIMBYs are seen as people living in rural or semi-rural communities." ‌ It also found almost three quarters believe rural communities have been overlooked over the past 15 years. And three in five feel their communities are in decline. The MPs' report said: "We must ensure that rural communities, left behind by successive Conservative governments, are front and centre of the Labour government's mission for inclusive growth and opportunity." Ms Riddell-Carpenter, who overturned ex-Tory Deputy PM Therese Coffey's massive majority in the Suffolk Coastal constituency last year, added: "Our report shows – in black and white – rural voters do not see themselves as NIMBYs, in fact many people rightly despise the term." ‌ She added: "They are rightly proud of, and ambitious for, their local area - they want to see new jobs, more affordable homes, and better opportunities for young people. We need to make sure that growth and development in rural areas matches this strong local identity, and that we put forward proposals that local people can be proud of in their back yard." A Labour source told The Mirror: 'Labour was elected to deliver change. We are proud of our ambition to create a fairer Britain. Working families don't feel that sense of fairness yet. People work hard and deserve a secure place to call home for them and their loved ones. 'Through our Plan for Change, Labour will unashamedly deliver on that promise. We'll build 1.5 million new homes during this Parliament, and create the infrastructure that gets them to work more quickly and seen by a doctor more swiftly.'

Middle-income workers shoulder biggest tax burden increase
Middle-income workers shoulder biggest tax burden increase

Telegraph

timean hour ago

  • Telegraph

Middle-income workers shoulder biggest tax burden increase

Middle-class workers are shouldering the biggest increase in the tax burden thanks to a stealth raid on thresholds, analysis suggests. The share of income tax paid by those who earn between £43,000 and £61,900 rose from 15.1pc to 17pc between 2021-22 and 2025-26, according to the TaxPayers' Alliance. During the same five-year period, the share of income tax paid by the top 1pc, those earning more than £201,000 a year, fell from 30.7pc to 26.6pc, the pressure group found. It comes as Chancellor Rachel Reeves faces a £50bn black hole in the public finances and declining tax revenue as high-net-worth individuals look to move abroad. Analysis by the Financial Times this month revealed there had been a 40pc rise in directors moving abroad since Labour's autumn Budget. The Taxpayers' Alliance report found the proportion of total income tax receipts increased for every group except for the top 1pc of earners, thanks to a series of stealth taxes first introduced by the Conservatives. Income tax thresholds, including the £12,570 tax-free 'personal allowance', were frozen at the 2021 budget by then chancellor Rishi Sunak until 2025-26. A year later, his successor, Jeremy Hunt, extended the freeze until 2027-28. Despite promising not to raise taxes on working people, Sir Keir Starmer has not ruled out extending the freeze further to 2029-30. Keeping thresholds frozen means earners lose a larger share of their incomes to tax, as inflation pushes up wages in a process known as fiscal drag. The stealth raid means almost 2.9 million more people will pay the basic rate of income tax in 2025-26 than in 2021-22, while over 2.6 million more will pay the higher rate. Including other rates, almost 6 million more people are forecast to be paying income tax than in 2021-22. John O'Connell, chief executive of the TaxPayers' Alliance, said: 'This is the sad but inevitable result of successive governments' assortment of anti-affluence tax policies, which penalise aspiration and success. 'The UK is now trapped in a doom loop with the Chancellor desperately scrabbling around for more cash to fill the fiscal black hole and increasingly finding her only option is to come after the middle classes. 'Rachel Reeves needs to now show some humility and reverse the policies that have done so much to drive away high earners.' The respected National Institute of Economic and Social Research on Tuesday warned slowing economic growth, a weak jobs market and Labour's failure to commit to welfare reform meant Ms Reeves was on course to miss her borrowing targets by £41.2bn. When combined with the £9.9bn of headroom the Chancellor has committed to keeping, it means she is facing a £51.1bn deficit in the autumn that will either have to be solved by raising taxes or cutting spending. The study also underlined the importance for the Treasury's balance sheet to keep the highest earners in Britain. Despite the proportion of tax paid by the top 1pc of earners falling, the group still accounts for more than a quarter of all income tax receipts. Analysis of Companies House by the Financial Times found that 3,790 company directors had left Britain between October and July compared with 2,712 in the same period a year earlier. Significant names have included Richard Gnodde, Goldman Sachs ' most senior banker outside the US, Nassef Sawiris, the Aston Villa co-owner, and British property tycoon brothers Ian and Richard Livingstone. It comes after Labour launched a wide-ranging tax raid after coming to power last year. This included abolishing the non-dom status and tightening inheritance tax rules. Laura Suter, of AJ Bell, said: 'Government tax policy in the past few years has had the dual outcome of pushing some of the wealthiest to leave the UK and also landing more taxpayers with higher tax bills at the same time. 'Together, this means that an increasing proportion of the total tax bill of the country is paid by middle earners, rather than the super-rich. 'Looking ahead, any potential tax-raising measures that Rachel Reeves makes in her next Budget could exacerbate this dynamic further.' Trevor Williams, a former chief economist at Lloyds Bank, previously warned Britain was facing a millionaires' exodus. Mr Williams said: 'Since 2014, the number of resident millionaires in the UK dropped by 9pc compared with the world's 10 wealthiest countries' global average growth of more than 40pc. 'Over the same period, the US saw a 78pc increase in millionaires – the fastest wealth growth [among these countries].' The Treasury insisted that under its Plan for Change it would keep more money in people's pockets. A spokesman said: 'This government inherited the previous government's policy of frozen tax thresholds. At the Budget and the Spring Statement, the Chancellor announced that we would not extend that freeze. 'We are also protecting payslips for working people by keeping our promise to not raise the basic, higher or additional rates of income tax, employee National Insurance or VAT. That's the Plan for Change – protecting people's incomes and putting money into people's pockets.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store