EXCLUSIVE: Cornwall Parliamentary spokesperson suspended as Greens fall out over transgender policy

Posted By on 18th June 2018

18th June 2018 By Graham Smith A Parliamentary spokesperson in Cornwall is set to become the county’s first politician to be suspended by his political party over the issue of…

To view the rest of this article, please subscribe to Cornwall Reports

This article has 3 comments

  1. Hi Richard,

    For those who know me they will know that my comments were sarcastic, and not genuinely aimed at you personally. On this particular issue I would venture that we are of similar minds – I support equality and diversity.

    I’m not for actively promoting differences, that kind of defeats the point of equality, but at the same time I am against anything that actively discriminates against, discourages or detracts from differences … in a nutshell I’m very much live and let live, each to their own.

    However, even I agree that if someone decides to self identify as anything at all, that does not change the reality of who they actually are, particularly where that self-identity can be fluid and changeable depending on the circumstances.

    More to the point, it would cause all sorts of problems in society that not only would we be unable to manage it to everyone’s expectations, it would lead to ridiculous situations that are unresolveable. A good example in this instance would be a male approaching the retirement age of women … if he chose to self identify as a woman (and the legislation meant that this should be respected) would he then be allowed to retire earlier? Which pension would he/she claim? What would happen if he/she decided to re-self identify as a male, once in retirement? Would he/she then have to return to the workplace?

    But your point about self-identity and toilets … completely agree. I don’t have a daughter, but if I did I would be perturbed in the extreme if I thought that she wasn’t able to use a public loo for fear of encountering a man in those toilets. This would cause all sorts of distress and future mental harm …

  2. Thanks for the coverage of this issue, Graham.

    I don’t remember describing the policy as “nutty” but would agree that it is tautological, that I disagree with what I perceive to be the ideology behind it and have voiced this many times, that I voted against it. Also, that the central point, as you have identified is around protecting the rights of women that women have fought for over such a long time-frame.

    I do feel somewhat (mis)judged by Adam Harris’s judgments above: here is a link to my full statement:


  3. LOL – a Green who spouts the “principles of universal democracy” and that everyone should be able to do what they want, wherever they want, whenever they want … “but not this, no, I don’t agree with this.”

    Thin end of the wedge of a very slippery slope when you start to cherry pick exemptions to universally held beliefs and principles … next he’ll be objecting to people with freckles having a disabled parking badge and ginger haired people getting married.

Comments are closed.