Latest news with #DrummondBone
The Herald Scotland
2 days ago
- Politics
- The Herald Scotland
Sex Matters warns National Library over book ban law breach
The charity said the decision 'creates a hostile environment for gender-critical staff' and 'discriminates against members of the public who share those beliefs'. They added: 'By April 18, 2026, when the exhibition closes, you could be facing thousands of claims under the Equality Act.' READ MORE In their letter to National Librarian and NLS chief executive Amina Shah, and to board chair Sir Drummond Bone, Sex Matters chief executive Maya Forstater, director of advocacy Helen Joyce and director of campaigns Fiona McAnena said many of the chapters in Women Who Wouldn't Wheesht were "personal testimonies to the harassment and discrimination faced by women who express this belief in Scotland today'. 'Gender-critical belief is covered by the protection against belief discrimination in the Equality Act under Section 10. 'As an employer and service provider you have a legal obligation not to subject your staff to harassment or discrimination on the basis of their beliefs, and not to subject members of the public who may use the library or visit its exhibitions to direct or indirect discrimination based on their belief.' The letter says the exclusion could also breach the law on unlawful harassment under Section 26, which covers unwanted conduct 'that violates a person's dignity or creates an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment' linked to a protected characteristic. 'Displaying books that individuals may disagree with or even find offensive is not harassment; it is core to the job of a library,' they wrote. 'However, refusing to display a book in an exhibition of books nominated by the public because it relates to a protected belief is an action that could well meet the test for harassment in relation to your gender-critical staff.' NLS is celebrating its 100th year (Image: National Library of Scotland) They also warned it could meet the threshold for direct discrimination under Section 13. 'The internal documents about the decision released under Freedom of Information reveal that this is exactly what you did: you decided to exclude this book, which was nominated by four members of the public, from the exhibition after a group of staff claimed — without evidence — that there were groups behind it that were 'exclusionary', and that including it would cause those staff 'severe harm'. "They threatened 'to notify LGBT+ partners' if you went ahead with the original plan to include the book in the exhibition.' The letter continues: 'Imagine if a small group of staff complained about the inclusion of a book by black authors about their experience of racism, a book by gay authors about their experience of homophobia, or a book by Jewish authors about their experience of antisemitism. "You would have had no difficulty recognising this as a call to discriminate based on a protected characteristic.' It accuses library management of capitulating to threats and of using 'a tool that is meant to help you identify and mitigate risks of undertaking unlawful discrimination as a device for discrimination', calling the Equality Impact Assessment (EqIA) a 'sham' because it omitted the protected characteristic of belief. The charity has called on the NLS to reinstate the book 'without denigrating it with a sign calling it divisive', meet editors Susan Dalgety and Lucy Hunter Blackburn, apologise to authors and nominators, and 'consider what other reasonable steps, such as training, you could take to prevent future harassment based on gender-critical belief and to build a true culture of inclusion.' Read more: Judicial guidance on discrimination cases, the charity added, gives a range of £1,200 to £12,000 for injury to feelings in less serious cases — meaning thousands of claims could lead to multi-million pound exposure. Members of the public were invited to nominate 'books that shaped people's lives' for the Dear Library exhibition. After securing four public nominations, two more than the others that made the display, The Women Who Wouldn't Wheesht — which features more than 30 essays from contributors including JK Rowling, Joanna Cherry KC and Ash Regan — was initially confirmed for inclusion on May 14 with 'safeguarding measures' in place. FOI documents show the same day, an internal note described it as 'a book that calls for exclusion of a section of society' and suggested 'calling it divisive [might] minimise the harm caused by including it'. In an email, the staff LGBT+ network said it was 'disappointed' and alleged 'the group behind it are explicitly exclusionary in nature.' The network compared the book's stance to 'racist, homophobic and other discriminatory and exclusionary viewpoints', warning of a 'detrimental' impact on staff, visitors and relationships with marginalised communities. On May 15, the network met urgently with managers. The EqIA, completed on May 21, cited perceived harm, asserted increases in hate crime, risks of being seen to endorse 'anti-trans ideology', a 'detrimental impact on staff', visitors feeling 'emotionally impacted', potential backlash from external partners, losing trust, and the risk of protests. It also warned of the risk of accusations of censorship and that it would be the only book from that perspective in the exhibition. On May 28, Ms Shah wrote to Sir Drummond recommending exclusion 'not due to the content of the book itself or the views expressed, but to the potential impact on key stakeholders and the reputation of the Library". "There is a risk that they will withdraw their support for the exhibition and the centenary,' she added. Sir Drummond agreed. FOI records show no equivalent review was carried out for any other book, and no suggestion that titles presenting the opposite perspective should be reassessed. READ MORE Joanna Cherry KC said she was 'appalled' the NLS had 'bowed to pressure from a small group within their staff to censor a book written by feminists, sex abuse survivors and lesbians, about their experiences during an important period in Scottish recent history'. Bathgate and Linlithgow MP Kirsteen Sullivan called the decision 'absolutely ridiculous — censoring a book that gives detailed accounts of women who have been unjustly censored!' In July, Ms Shah told a colleague the episode showed 'training on intellectual freedom is required' within the NLS. Following the backlash, Ms Shah told staff: 'It's important to note that the Library is not banning or censoring this or any other book. Anyone can visit our reading rooms and access it or any other title.' Dr Hunter Blackburn pushed back against that. 'This is unprofessional," she tweeted. "Anyone can see from the FoI, WWWW was not just another book that was left out. "There are 30+ pages of internal consideration about whether to accede to internal activist complaints about the initial decision to include it. The Chair was consulted.' An NLS spokesperson told The Herald: 'We will examine the contents of the letter and will respond in due course.'
The Herald Scotland
3 days ago
- Politics
- The Herald Scotland
National Library of Scotland in legal warning over gender book move
The charity said the decision 'creates a hostile environment for gender-critical staff' and 'discriminates against members of the public who share those beliefs'. They added: 'By April 18, 2026, when the exhibition closes, you could be facing thousands of claims under the Equality Act.' READ MORE In their letter to National Librarian and NLS chief executive Amina Shah, and to board chair Sir Drummond Bone, Sex Matters chief executive Maya Forstater, director of advocacy Helen Joyce and director of campaigns Fiona McAnena said many of the chapters in Women Who Wouldn't Wheesht were "personal testimonies to the harassment and discrimination faced by women who express this belief in Scotland today'. 'Gender-critical belief is covered by the protection against belief discrimination in the Equality Act under Section 10. 'As an employer and service provider you have a legal obligation not to subject your staff to harassment or discrimination on the basis of their beliefs, and not to subject members of the public who may use the library or visit its exhibitions to direct or indirect discrimination based on their belief.' The letter says the exclusion could also breach the law on unlawful harassment under Section 26, which covers unwanted conduct 'that violates a person's dignity or creates an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment' linked to a protected characteristic. 'Displaying books that individuals may disagree with or even find offensive is not harassment; it is core to the job of a library,' they wrote. 'However, refusing to display a book in an exhibition of books nominated by the public because it relates to a protected belief is an action that could well meet the test for harassment in relation to your gender-critical staff.' NLS is celebrating its 100th year (Image: National Library of Scotland) They also warned it could meet the threshold for direct discrimination under Section 13. 'The internal documents about the decision released under Freedom of Information reveal that this is exactly what you did: you decided to exclude this book, which was nominated by four members of the public, from the exhibition after a group of staff claimed — without evidence — that there were groups behind it that were 'exclusionary', and that including it would cause those staff 'severe harm'. "They threatened 'to notify LGBT+ partners' if you went ahead with the original plan to include the book in the exhibition.' The letter continues: 'Imagine if a small group of staff complained about the inclusion of a book by black authors about their experience of racism, a book by gay authors about their experience of homophobia, or a book by Jewish authors about their experience of antisemitism. "You would have had no difficulty recognising this as a call to discriminate based on a protected characteristic.' It accuses library management of capitulating to threats and of using 'a tool that is meant to help you identify and mitigate risks of undertaking unlawful discrimination as a device for discrimination', calling the Equality Impact Assessment (EqIA) a 'sham' because it omitted the protected characteristic of belief. The charity has called on the NLS to reinstate the book 'without denigrating it with a sign calling it divisive', meet editors Susan Dalgety and Lucy Hunter Blackburn, apologise to authors and nominators, and 'consider what other reasonable steps, such as training, you could take to prevent future harassment based on gender-critical belief and to build a true culture of inclusion.' Read more: Judicial guidance on discrimination cases, the charity added, gives a range of £1,200 to £12,000 for injury to feelings in less serious cases — meaning thousands of claims could lead to multi-million pound exposure. Members of the public were invited to nominate 'books that shaped people's lives' for the Dear Library exhibition. After securing four public nominations, two more than the others that made the display, The Women Who Wouldn't Wheesht — which features more than 30 essays from contributors including JK Rowling, Joanna Cherry KC and Ash Regan — was initially confirmed for inclusion on May 14 with 'safeguarding measures' in place. FOI documents show the same day, an internal note described it as 'a book that calls for exclusion of a section of society' and suggested 'calling it divisive [might] minimise the harm caused by including it'. In an email, the staff LGBT+ network said it was 'disappointed' and alleged 'the group behind it are explicitly exclusionary in nature.' The network compared the book's stance to 'racist, homophobic and other discriminatory and exclusionary viewpoints', warning of a 'detrimental' impact on staff, visitors and relationships with marginalised communities. On May 15, the network met urgently with managers. The EqIA, completed on May 21, cited perceived harm, asserted increases in hate crime, risks of being seen to endorse 'anti-trans ideology', a 'detrimental impact on staff', visitors feeling 'emotionally impacted', potential backlash from external partners, losing trust, and the risk of protests. It also warned of the risk of accusations of censorship and that it would be the only book from that perspective in the exhibition. On May 28, Ms Shah wrote to Sir Drummond recommending exclusion 'not due to the content of the book itself or the views expressed, but to the potential impact on key stakeholders and the reputation of the Library". "There is a risk that they will withdraw their support for the exhibition and the centenary,' she added. Sir Drummond agreed. FOI records show no equivalent review was carried out for any other book, and no suggestion that titles presenting the opposite perspective should be reassessed. READ MORE Joanna Cherry KC said she was 'appalled' the NLS had 'bowed to pressure from a small group within their staff to censor a book written by feminists, sex abuse survivors and lesbians, about their experiences during an important period in Scottish recent history'. Bathgate and Linlithgow MP Kirsteen Sullivan called the decision 'absolutely ridiculous — censoring a book that gives detailed accounts of women who have been unjustly censored!' In July, Ms Shah told a colleague the episode showed 'training on intellectual freedom is required' within the NLS. Following the backlash, Ms Shah told staff: 'It's important to note that the Library is not banning or censoring this or any other book. Anyone can visit our reading rooms and access it or any other title.' Dr Hunter Blackburn pushed back against that. 'This is unprofessional," she tweeted. "Anyone can see from the FoI, WWWW was not just another book that was left out. "There are 30+ pages of internal consideration about whether to accede to internal activist complaints about the initial decision to include it. The Chair was consulted.' An NLS spokesperson told The Herald: 'We will examine the contents of the letter and will respond in due course.'
