Showing posts with label Gender Recognition Act. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Gender Recognition Act. Show all posts

Thursday, 24 May 2018

The spectre of Section 28 still lingers on but there's hope for better LGBTQIA+ equality in the UK...


Today marks 30 years since Margaret Thatcher decided to enact Section 28, a draconian and discriminatory piece of legislation designed to stop education professionals in schools across the UK from discussing non-heteronormative sexual orientations in the classroom (with a specific focus on stopping gay and lesbian people, including teachers from talking about their sexual orientation and life experiences with students) with the ultimate aim of reducing the “promotion” of LGBTQIA+ lifestyles. Local authorities were also prevented from such “promoting”, with libraries being forced into not stocking literature or films that contained primarily gay, bi or lesbian themes, although Jeanette Winterson's Oranges are Not the Only Fruit (1985) was a notable novel read by students and studied for GCSE and A-Level exams which allowed young people to read about the life experiences of a young lesbian growing up in a deeply religious (Pentecostal) community.

I feel I owe a huge debt of gratitude to the LGBTQIA+ campaigners who fought against the introduction of this despicable clause from the off. For example, Joe Summerlad in his article for the Independent mentions the three amazing lesbian activists, calling themselves the “Lesbian Avengers” managed to gain access to the public gallery of the House of Lords and abseiled down to the chamber, an act which gained them and the anti-Section 28 cause national attention (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/section-28-explained-lgbt-education-schools-homosexuality-gay-queer-margaret-thatcher-a8366741.html) Mancunians also made their feelings towards the legislation clear with the “Never Going Underground” demo which took place on the 20th February 1988, and which attracted at least 20,000 demonstrators from around the UK and had speakers including Jimmy Somerville (http://www.gayinthe80s.com/2018/02/section-28-feb-20th-1988-never-going-underground-demo/).

Thatcher used her Christian conservatism to attack openly gay and lesbian people. She never acknowledged publicly (to my knowledge) the existence of bisexual people and I don't even want to contemplate what her views towards openly non-binary trans people like me would have been. The Tories pretty much backed her all the way, claiming that it was Labour who were determined to bring pro-LGBTQIA+ books into school to challenge “traditional values”. The Tories capitalised on
on the fear rhetoric perpetuated by the right-wing press, just like the social conservatives and trans-exclusionary radical feminists do today with regards to their attitudes towards trans activists and further trans equality. As Ruth Hunt points out in her very pertinent article, “shocking levels of misinformation and scaremongering are cruelly attacking trans people's right to exist, as well as publicly questioning their identities. Deeply misleading headlines about the GRA (Gender Recognition Act 2004) and young people “being turned trans” echoes exactly the way LGB people were talked about under Section 28” (https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/section-28-school-sexuality-education-gay-lgbt-trans-rights-thatcher-a8366751.html). Editorial teams based at The Sun, Daily Mail, Daily Express, New Statesman and The Spectator in particular need to look very carefully at the way they choose articles to include in their newspapers but I'm guessing they probably won't reform their processes given their desire to provide clickbait for the right-wing masses.

I went to primary school, junior school and the first 3 years of secondary school with Section 28 still being in place in England. It's no wonder that teachers, teaching assistants and pastoral staff were reluctant to talk about being gay, bi or lesbian to students like me in front of other students because they had not had the freedom to do so in the years before I entered the state education system.
Homophobic and biphobic language was commonplace in the junior school playground and I never heard such language challenged by the playground assistants. I have no doubt that young people I knew in my classes at secondary school internalised feelings of fear and believed the stereotypes being perpetuated and it made them feel they could not be proud of their sexuality, even after they decided to come out.

LGBTQIA+ rights have improved somewhat since the repeal of Section 28 under Tony Blair's Labour Government in 2003, not least with the introduction of the Equality Act in 2010 and the Same Sex Marriage Act 2013. However, the legacy of Section 28 still lingers on today. Just Like Us, an organisation who recruit LGBTQIA+ students to go into schools to champion LGBTQIA+ equality and that has created Schools Diversity Week to “empower schools across the UK to tackle homophobia, biphobia and transphobia” have recently reported that “almost 90% of young LGBTQ people still hear homophobic language in schools and 50% self-harm” (http://www.gaytimes.co.uk/news/106845/school-diversity-week-2018/). The Stonewall School Report 2017 found that 45% of LGBT respondents (and 65% of trans respondents) have experienced bullying at school and the statistics highlight that LGBTQIA+ people of faith and people of colour are more likely to experience bullying and hate incidents whilst at school (https://www.stonewall.org.uk/school-report-2017). Meanwhile we have radical feminist dominated organisations such as Transgender Trend who claim they are “gender critical” advocating for trans people not being given the opportunity to talk about their life experiences in school for fear of “turning children trans” (an out and out lie on their part) and we have some education professionals who have a socially conservative mindset still fiercely resisting calls to introduce LGBTQIA+ Relationship and Sex Education (RSE) into all schools in England. They cite freedom of conscience, religion and expression as a legitimate basis for their objections. Yet in their efforts to defend “traditional British values”, they fail to acknowledge the liberal, modern values that we should all possess, either as British Citizens or residents of the UK or as I like to think, as Citizens of the World. Compassion and love of diversity are values central to a liberal, progressive outlook. So are tolerance and reverence for the Rule of Law. Any programme that can reduce instances of hate incidents and hate crime motivated by homophobia, biphobia and transphobia should be endorsed wholeheartedly. Any programme that promotes love and understanding for one another over misinformation and mistrust is one that I cannot help endorse as a Lutheran Christian. Yet worrying evidence collated by Dr Laura Watt and Professor Mark Elliot from the National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles carried out by 1990 and 2010 have shown that acceptance of same-sex relationships percentages has slowed down since 2000, with 60% of 16-44 year olds who attended at least 1 religious service a week viewing homosexuality as always wrong when asked in 2010 (only down by 8% from 1990 figures) (http://www.manchester.ac.uk/discover/news/peak-acceptance-of-homosexuality/).
Demonstrating freedom of conscience and expression, the things that religious conservatives bang on about so often means that every student has the right to explore diverse life experiences through finding out about LGBTQIA+ role models. Students of all ages have the right to explore their own feelings towards sexuality and gender through access to age-appropriate RSE sources. Just as students should have the opportunity to find out about multiple faiths in their Religious Education lessons, free from teacher judgment/bias. To me therefore it is illiberal for social conservatives to even object on the grounds of conscience or religion to LGBTQIA+ people being encouraged to come into local schools and talk about their life experiences, just as it would be illiberal to object to faith representatives coming into schools to talk about their experiences.

Numerous organisations have highlighted the lack of LGBTQIA+ RSE within the PSHE curriculum post the repeal of Section 28. A survey by Stonewall found that only 13% of respondents had learned about healthy same-sex relationships, 1 in 5 had learned about consent law in relation to same-sex relationships and 20% have learnt about keeping themselves safe in same-sex experiences. Fewer students have learned about trans people's experiences of sex. As for exploring asexual (ace) experiences in the classroom, very few teachers have the awareness necessary to facilitate discussions, despite more young people coming out openly as ace whilst at secondary school (although much more research needs to be conducted to highlight this).

There are increasing numbers of LGBTQIA+ graduates entering the teaching profession and education sector as a whole and an increasing number of teachers coming out. Teach First has collated data on the number of LGBT+ teachers between 2014 and 2018 and found there had been a 4% increase. The Independent (who has really led the way on coverage of LGBTQIA+ issues I think) has an article where several LGBT teachers who have been part of the Teach First programme talk about what actions they have taken to improve awareness inside the classroom. For example Laura, a teacher based in London decided to hold LGBT+ assemblies, run clubs, and taken her sixth form students to London Pride to march. I love Laura's passion for empowering her students to be positive about their own sexuality and gender identity and agree with her that her students “will continue to strive for a more accepting and equal society (https://www.indy100.com/article/lgbt-teachers-section-28-sexuality-education-schools-8363746).

It's great that we now have more role models like Laura for students to look up-to but there still needs to be changes to attitudes in the workplace to ensure that trans, non-binary, genderqueer, gender-fluid, and agender people feel they can enter and thrive in the teaching profession. A real-time poll, carried out by the NASUWT of attendees at their LGBTI Teachers' Consultation Conference, held in Birmingham (https://www.nasuwt.org.uk/article-listing/not-doing-enough-to-promote-lgbti-equality-.html) found that:
  • 43% of respondents have experienced discrimination, bullying, harassment, or victimisation in the last 12 months because of their LGBTI identity
  • 29% of respondents stated that levels of anti LGBTI bullying and language have increased or stayed the same in their school in recent years
  • 86% of respondents said they do not believe that the Government is doing enough to communicate the importance of LGBTI equality to schools and colleges
  • 56% of respondents said their school wasn't committed to LGBTI equality for staff and pupils
  • 4% of respondents said their school had a programme of activities to mark LGBT month
  • 1/3 of respondents said their school or college wasn't a safe space for LGBT teachers
  • 49% of attendees said they wouldn't recommend teaching as a career to families or friends.
In the same vein, a 2018 British Social Attitudes survey found that whilst over 8 in 10 British people described themselves as not being “prejudiced at all” towards trans people, only 4 in 10 had said that trans people who had the qualifications needed to become a primary school teacher should “definitely be” employed in that role (http://www.natcen.ac.uk/blog/how-do-british-people-feel-about-transphobia-and-transgender-issues). This is concerning and highlights the work that needs to be done to debunk stereotypes that have pervaded about trans people and the interactions they may have through positive engagement work with governors and parents in schools.

It must be remembered that schools and colleges (and local authorities for that matter) are bound under the Equality Act to help improve LGBT+ equality. Under the Public Sector Equality Duty, schools must ensure they pay “due regard to the need to eliminate discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any conduct that is prohibited under the Act; to advance equality or opportunity between those who share a protected characteristic and those who do not and to foster good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not” (https://www.churchofengland.org/sites/default/files/2017-11/Valuing%20All%20God%27s%20Children%27s%20Report_0.pdf). If schools and colleges do not adhere to this Duty, they can face enforcement action brought by the Equality and Human Rights Commission. So what more could be done by schools to further fulfill the Public Sector Equality Duty? Well for starters, every school needs to check their Equal Opportunities/Equality and Diversity policy to ensure they are trans-inclusive. A specific commitment to tackling homophobic, biphobic and transphobic bullying should be contained within the Anti-Bullying policy. Forms should be reviewed to ensure students can reflect their identity openly but only information that is absolutely necessary should be collected. An Equality and Diversity steering group with student representatives would be a great way of reviewing and amending such policies.

Teachers should feel empowered to follow clearly defined procedures in the event of students using persistant transphobic language in the classroom and address that language as soon as they hear it. There should be LGBTQIA+ clubs available to students to attend at lunchtime or after school with activities, support and advice being offered.

Access to training on trans awareness should be available to all members of staff and volunteers as part of their Continuing Professional Development, with that training being delivered by qualified and experienced people. Stonewall, Gendered Intelligence are examples of organisations that have offered very effective training but there are a diverse range of trainers located across the UK, including those who are trans, non-binary, genderqueer, gender-fluid or agender who could be counted upon to deliver appropriate training. Members of the community who are LGBTQIA+ should be invited to deliver assemblies, attend RSE/PSHE lessons and/or work with students on Pride celebrations.

RSE and PSHE leads should have the opportunity to attend LGBTQIA+ specific conferences and network with organisations so they can have access to the research and support network they need to deliver truly LGBTQIA+ inclusive RSE. I hope more conferences will be created for RSE professionals as the subject is made a statutory part of the curriculum from next September.

Making provisions to celebrate key awareness days and awareness weeks would also help to raise the profile of LGBTQIA+ people in schools (aside from LGBT month in February).
A list of key dates that I'm aware of are listed below:

  • Zero Discrimination Day: March 1st
  • International Transgender Day of Visibility: March 31st
  • Lesbian Visibility Day: 26th April
  • International Day Against Homophobia, Biphobia and Transphobia: May 17th
  • School Diversity Week: July 2nd-8th
  • Bisexual Visibility Day: September 23rd
  • Asexual Awareness Week:
  • National Coming Out Day: October 11th
  • Hate Crime Awareness Week: October 15th- 22nd
  • Intersex Awareness Day: October 26th
  • Intersex Day of Remembrance/Intersex Solidarity Day: November 8th
  • Transgender Awareness Week: (Second week of November)
The results of the LGBT survey, commissioned by the Government last year and which has had over 100,000 responses is due to be released in a few weeks time. PM Theresa May has promised to create a strategy designed to reduce the prevalence of homophobia, biphobia and transphobia and advance LGBTQIA+ rights. I hope that such a strategy will include more funding for trans awareness training in schools, statutory LGBTQIA+ inclusive RSE guidance and a move towards self-identification of legal gender. A bold approach is needed if society is to continue the fight to improve LGBTQIA+ rights and equality in the UK. Let's hope those changes I've highlighted above will spearhead that bold approach.


Monday, 12 June 2017

General Election Result 2017: How could it affect LGBTQIA+ Rights in the UK?

It looks like we're going to have a Conservative minority government in place backed up by an openly anti LGBTQIA+ rights party (the Democratic Unionists) for the next few months at least and I for one am wondering what this will mean for LGBTQIA+ people, especially trans, non-binary, gender-fluid, genderqueer, intersex and asexual people in the UK. As I have mentioned on my blog (http://sassysvensknorsk.blogspot.co.uk/2017/06/exploring-ge2017-manifestos-lgbtqia.html) the Conservative manifesto itself was very short on ideas, with the only direct mentions of LGBTQIA+ being a commitment to tackle hate crime on the basis of "transgender identity" (why not gender identity and include non-binary, gender-fluid, genderqueer and agender people in this promise?) and expanding the UK's global efforts to "tackle the perpetuation of violence against people because of their faith, gender or sexuality."

Prime Minister May was making promises here there and everywhere during her Pink News interview to try and entice LGBTQIA+ voters to back the Tory party at the polls, including supporting a "thorough and independent investigation" to examine human rights abuses against LGBT people in Chechnya (after I suspect being pressured into it by other party leaders and MPs; for example, Sarah Champion, the Shadow Secretary of State for Women and Equalities wrote to PM May on 21st April 2017 to call for an urgent UN investigation). It remains to be seen as to whether a Tory minority government held to ransom by an openly anti-LGBTQIA+ rights DUP would push ahead with such calls, let alone look at a comprehensive review of the Gender Recognition Act (GRA) 2004. I remain deeply sceptical as to whether any progress will be made at all to improve LGBTQIA+ rights on the two policy elements included in the Tory manifesto, let alone on the pledges that PM May made in the Pink News interview. Can we really trust PM May when she says that a review into the effectiveness of the GRA could lead to the scrapping of the need for medical diagnosis? Conservative MPs in the main rarely show support for such a policy because it doesn't register highly on the list of priorities. Tory activists keep telling us trans and non-binary people that we should be thankful for the progress that's already been made, as if all we cared about was the legalisation of same-sex marriage or the pardoning of LGB people. I voted for a progressive vision for the UK, not one that stands still and wallows in a sea of utra smug complacency. If the vote tells MPs anything, it should be that young people especially do not believe that there is much for the Tory government to be complacent about. Change is required and it needs to take place sharpish.

The DUP is certainly anti-LGBTQIA+ rights and they have never voted for any legislation to improve LGBTQIA+ rights. There are the well-documented comments of Ian Paisley Junior, who said that he was "repulsed by gay and lesbianism" back in 2007 as well as the party's involvement in the despicable "Save Ulster from Sodomy" movement but there are certain aspects of their and there are certain aspects of their policy platform that should alarm LGBTQIA+ people; for example they  have unashamedly backed a "conscience clause"  which would guarantee any religious conservative legal protection from openly discriminating against LGBT people in a public environment, which is completely against the provisions of our own Equality Act (EA) 2010. I will never support any attempt to bring in legislation that will allow employers to discriminate because their conscience tells them to treat applicants differently on the basis of their gender identity or sexual orientation. There's likely to be very little movement  blood donation ban for men who have sex with men either whilst the Conservatives remain dependent on the DUP (they want to retain the blood ban). I want to see the Advisory Committee on the Safety of Blood, Tissues and Organs conduct a review so that the case can be made to remove the blood ban in its entirety in the near future but I doubt the Conservatives are brave enough to conduct that review. Shame.

Gender Recognition Act 2004 and Equality Act 2010:
There's no doubt that the Gender Recognition Act needs urgent reform; in the last Parliamentary term the Conservative government announced that there would be a review into the GRA, with Nicky Morgan, the Secretary of State for Women and Equalities way back in July 2016 stating that she understood that disclosing "traumatic details of past surgery" was distressing and that trans people were being treated "as if they had a mental illness." The review that has been proposed is meant to be looking into ways of moving the GRA process from "medicalised questions" to "self declaration". I've not heard more on this since July 2016 and there's been no progress on other promises that were made by Nicky Morgan before the current Secretary for Women and Equalities, Justine Greening took over. I argue that there must be a firm commitment to at least reviewing the Spousal Veto with a view to removing it; there is no need for it to exist in law and there should be a review of rights so that couples with a trans or non-binary partner have the same access to pension rights and the custody of any children in the event of bereavement as the Lib Dems suggested in their manifesto.

Non-binary and intersex people should not need to prove their status to gain access to neutral gender markers for all appropriate legal documentation, including passports. Legislating for this isn't going to lead to the direct erosion of other people's' gender identities or human rights. So I really do not get why the Tories will not take a progressive stance and implement legislative reform now. I think that unnecessary requests for gender information should also be reduced on official documentation wherever possible.

We also need to see positive action with regards to amending the Equality Act. I can no longer see any logical reason to delay the substitution of the protected characteristic "gender reassignment surgery" for "gender identity", especially given the fact that the Government plans to amend the EA to include protection for those with mental health conditions anyways. I'd also like to see intersex people be specifically protected under the EA with the protected characteristic "intersex" being added to the list. There must be a commitment to banning unnecessary sex assignment surgery on an infant or a young child (i.e. when it is not done for health reasons) and in fact I agree with the Green Party's LGBTQIA+ manifesto suggestion that conducting such surgery should be made a criminal offence. Young intersex people should have the right to determine their own sex and engage in surgery if they have given their explicit consent. There definitely needs to be more training given to NHS professionals to help them support intersex patients and encourage intersex activists to work with healthcare professionals and be part of patient groups to help formulate training materials to help facilitate discussion. Extending legal protection against discrimination to non-binary, gender-fluid, genderqueer and intersex people is essential and reforming the EA will lay the groundwork for this. I hope the Conservatives are brave enough to commit to at least some of the suggestions outlined above.

The Tories did commit to conducting a study to "measure the size of the UK's population" in July 2016 but I wonder what the direct benefits of capturing this data would be; would it convince them that they need to expand gender neutral bathroom and changing room facilities, for example? There's also the question of whether a government obsessed with Brexit will be interested in analysing the results of the study to help them improve their policies. Labour on the other hand may take on board the results of the survey and add policies in as appropriate; if they want to increase their vote share amongst younger voters I'd say that it would benefit them greatly if they bring in more nuanced policies that can deliver equality for trans, non-binary, gender-fluid, genderqueer and agender people.

NHS: 
I still believe it is essential to boost funding for sexual health services in England, especially to continue fighting HIV stigma. Sexual health clinics (Genito-urinary medicine services) need to receive funding so that specific advice and guidance can continue to be offered to young people embarking on same-sex experiences for the first time. According to an article "What do cuts in sexual health mean for patients?" written by Ruth Robertson from The Kings Fund in April 2017 (https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/blog/2017/03/what-do-cuts-sexual-health-services-mean-patients), funding for sexual health clinics through the public health grant given to local authorities fell by 6.7% during 2015/16 and cuts have been planned up to 2020/21. However demand has been increasing (new attendance rates increased from 1.6m in 2011 to 2.1m in 2015) and there was a survey conducted by the Kings Fund which found that patients who have symptoms related to a Sexually Transmitted Infection were waiting more than 48 hours to be seen by a professional. The current expectation is that the public health budget ringfence will be removed by 2019/20, meaning that local authorities could face tough choices regarding GUM funding; whilst a comprehensive STI testing and treatment service needs to be in place (thanks to a mandatory law from 1916), other services such as family planning or the provision of free contraceptives may be reduced dramatically.

With regards to Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) provision, it appears that there has been no progress in England. Caroline Lucas, Co-Leader of the Green Party and MP for Brighton Pavilion has highlighted the fact that despite NHS England announcing that a PrEP trial would be set up 6 months ago, no such trial has materialised. The Tories have set £10m aside for the trial to take place over the next 3 years and claim that they will wait for the results of the trial before making any decision RE PrEP availability on the NHS but this may not happen until near the end of a full-term Conservative minority government, if at all.

There's been no open discussion about how to improve NHS training for GPs so they have a framework of best practice to help them better support trans patients and there's certainly no plans under a Conservative government to review trans healthcare provision more generally. We need more Gender Identity Clinics to respond to increased demand and help reduce waiting times and we need more specialist sexologists and nurses to staff those new GICs. There's also no plans to review how non-binary, gender-fluid and genderqueer people are treated by NHS staff, which is rather disappointing. There should also be an attempt to safeguard trans patient hospital rights so they can be treated in the ward which corresponds to their acquired gender whenever possible (another great Lib Dem manifesto suggestions).

Finally I believe there has to be a commitment from the Tories to ensure that mental health services are properly funded and accessible to LGBTQIA+ service users. Labour and the Lib Dems both promised in their manifestos to fully fund mental health but the Conservatives haven't made such commitment. We need to recruit more mental health nurses (6,600 have gone since 2010) and I hope the Tory manifesto commitment to recruit 10,000 more NHS mental health professionals by 2020 will be met but a huge reduction in applications from EU nurses of  96% since the Brexit vote and the refusal of the Tories to remove the 1% NHS pay cap isn't going to help increase staffing levels and the removal of training bursaries for UK nursing applicants won't entice students to consider a career in nursing.

Education: 
Sex and Relationships Education will be delivered in schools during this parliamentary term but I wonder how LGBTQIA+ inclusive it will be. The Conservatives agreed with Labour that guidance needs to be issued to schools to help them prepare lesson materials on LGBT+ relationships but there is no indication as to whether there will be any lessons that address intersex or asexual people. When would discussion of trans and non-binary, genderfluid or genderqueer people start? Key Stage 3 or Key Stage 4? Will there be lessons on domestic violence and domestic abuse in addition to consent and  will those lessons include LGBTQIA+ focussed discussions? Will SRE be taught in faith schools? I hope that trans, non-binary, gender-fluid, genderqueer, agender, intersex and asexual activists will be involved in the creation of materials and be encouraged to go into schools to talk to students about more than just homophobic, biphobic and transphobic bullying as has been the case in the past. I believe discussions about asexuality is important because no student should ever feel that asexual people are weird because they have no sexual desire or prefer to show affection through hugging rather than through penetrative sex. Humanity is far more interesting than gender and sexuality stereotypes portray and that should be reflected in SRE lessons in an age-appropriate but engaging way.  74% of 11-15 year olds when asked in a YouGov poll conducted by Barnardo's believe that they would feel safer if they were taught about sex and relationships in schools with 94% stating it was important for them to understand the risks and dangers of being online (including accessing gay chatrooms). The Terrence Higgins Trust and National Student Pride survey also found that 72% of students would have had a better first sexual experience if they had received LGBT+ inclusive SRE. These figures demonstrate to me that LGBTQIA+ activists should back the implementation of SRE and get involved with the creation of teaching materials.

We need more LGBTQIA+ teachers and teaching assistants in classrooms to provide positive role-models for our students and I believe there should be a national recruitment campaign designed to encourage more openly LGBTQIA+ graduates to apply for a PGCE course with a range of LGBTQIA+ rights organisations involved, including Stonewall. Ensuring that students are taught about how to be tolerant of people who may have a different gender identity or sexuality is imperative and I've had enough of sticky-plaster policies that tend to only address bullying and harassment after it has occurred. Let's make sure that teachers and headteachers who have pastoral care duties have the knowledge and skills needed to fully support LGBTQIA+ identifying students; building an awareness programme into the PGCE course and into Continuing Professional Development, led by trainers who come from the LGBTQIA+ community will help no end.

LGBTQIA+ asylum rights: 
LGBTQIA+ rights for refugees and asylum seekers in the UK may unfortunately not improve under a Conservative minority government. PM May doesn't have a good track record in this area after all; as Home Secretary she allowed LGBTQIA+ refugees to be humiliated, forcing lesbian, gay and bisexual refugees to have sex to prove that they were LGB...a totally barbaric and anti-human rights approach. The Green Party's LGBTQIA+ manifesto and the Lib Dem's manifesto both convinced me that far needs to be done to protect LGBTQIA+ refugees and asylum seekers from discrimination, including ensuring that no LGBTQIA+ asylum seekers are deported back to their home country if they are in danger of facing persecution on the basis of gender identity or sexual orientation. In fact the Green Party has called for a moratorium on the deportation of LGBTQIA+ asylum seekers until a review of the asylum process takes place with a view to making the process more efficient and quicker. Border agents do need to have equality and diversity training so they understand that asking sexually-explicit questions is wrong (especially if LGBTQIA+ asylum seekers have been subjected to rape before or during their journey to the UK). I believe that detention limits should be set at 28 days and asylum seekers should be allowed to look for work if they have been waiting for their asylum claim to be processed for more than 6 weeks. Accommodation should be habitable and trans and non-binary asylum seekers should be treated with respect, with professionals using their pronoun preferences wherever possible. Asylum seekers also need to have access to counselling to help them deal with the trauma they have faced whilst being persecuted in their home country. There's no indication at the moment as to whether the Conservatives are bothered to carry out any of these reforms.

Homelessness:
PM May said in her Pink News interview that homeless charities such as The Albert Kennedy Trust should be "encouraged to help end LGBT youth homelessness in the UK". The problem is that the actions taken by the Tory government have as of yet done very little to address the problem. Charities cannot fund young people aged between 18 and 21 who have lost mandatory access to Housing Benefit. Research carried out by The Albert Kennedy Trust found that nearly a 1/4 of LGBT young people are homeless in the UK and their projects rely on Housing Benefit funding to run properly; for example, according to a Financial Times article from March 2017 (https://www.ft.com/content/1414f788-30e8-11e7-9555-23ef563ecf9a) the Purple Door Project run by The Albert Kennedy Trust in London and Newcastle guarantees housing for 6 months but requires residents to pay £105 a week - £95 of which comes from Housing Benefit. The Conservatives need to absolutely guarantee homeless young people aged 18-21, whether LGBTQIA+ or not access to Housing Benefit. That includes those young people who may be currently sofa-surfing. Young people want to build a better life for themselves and a compassionate government should do everything they can to help, especially those who have had a traumatic start to their lives.

Brexit:
Brexit means Brexit, or so the old sage Theresa May's maxim goes. I've always wondered how Brexit will affect LGBTQIA+ people specifically. There is concern about the right of LGBTQIA+ EU nationals to remain in the UK post-Brexit and I think it was a mistake of PM May not to guarantee the right outright before Article 50 was triggered. It sent out the wrong signal to our EU neighbours that the UK may be prepared to openly discriminate against their citizens. EU nationals pay tax into our system to help fund our public services and some even work in the public sector, including in hospitals and GP surgeries. We now have a situation where applications from EU nurses are down 96% since the Brexit vote and we're not training enough UK nurses to fill the demand, so we need to have a change of tone as well as policy from PM May and her Brexit team.

There's been hardly any discussion about how Brexit will improve the lives of LGBTQIA+ people. Will the money that is meant to be saved from the EU budget contributions go partly towards improving trans health services or towards the construction of gender-neutral bathroom facilities? Doesn't sound like it. Will the money fund more training programmes for frontline NHS professionals to help them better support LGBTQIA+ patients? Why aren't the Tories doing that anyways? Will the money be used to help expand GICs? More chance of seeing a pot of leprechaun gold on the front seat of Bojo's personalised imaginary red NHS £350m bus. Will leaving the EU truly lead to more jobs for trans people? Unless we change the attitude of employers, especially small and medium business owners in rural constituencies, we're not going to see more openly trans and non-binary people employed in long-term, sustainable employment. I still contend that Brexit will not make any progressive difference to LGBTQIA+ rights in this country and that's why I still remain opposed to it. Plus I don't want to see the UK leave the European Convention on Human Rights or water down the Human Rights Act 1998, both of which may still happen under a Tory minority government.

Conclusion:
Overall, I am feeling pretty concerned about the possible state of LGBTQIA+ rights under a Tory minority government. Whilst I accept that LGBT Tories want voters like me to feel reassured about the promises elicited by Ruth Davidson, Justine Greening et al that LGBT rights will not be weakened by any DUP "confidence and supply" arrangement, it does probably mean that we will see little to no progress on improving NHS services for LGBTQIA+ service users or any improvement in the rights of intersex and asexual people in the UK. SRE may or may not become LGBT inclusive, let alone LGBTQIA+. I can't see a nervous Tory government asking for a review on the blood donation ban or amend the GRA or EA significantly whilst relying on DUP votes. As for PrEP becoming available on the NHS in England before 2022 (or whenever the next election happens to be), we have more chance of Andrea "I'm a mother" Leadsom becoming PM in the next year. However, that doesn't mean that LGBTQIA+ activists are going to sit back and let this parliamentary term take its course. We need to continue campaigning for truly LGBTQIA+ inclusive SRE and to improve health services for trans, non-binary, gender-fluid, genderqueer and intersex people. We need to encourage PM May to continue to take a firm stance against Chechnya and if possible, allow Chechen LGBTQIA+ people to claim asylum in the UK.  We need to stand up and be counted. If we stay strong, a progressive vision for LGBTQIA+ rights can be achieved. It's just going to take a little bit longer to achieve!