Safeguarding - Greens in Exile

What is Safeguarding?

Safeguarding means protecting people’s health, wellbeing and human rights, and enabling them to live free from harm, abuse and neglect.

The Green Party like any other organisation has a duty to ensure sufficient safeguarding policies are in place to provide protection for members against issues such as abuse and bullying, as well as ensuring that any children, or at risk adults, are sufficiently protected.

A failure to adequately fulfil this duty can lead to serious legal ramifications and bring the Party into disrepute. As long ago as 2021 the Equality and Human Rights Commission intervened in the Maya Forstater unfair dismissal case to make clear the right of every citizen to hold beliefs that sex was immutable and could not be changed. Needless to say, Ms Forstater won her case and set the legal precedent still used today.

Green Party Safeguarding policy

Like all organisations the Green Party maintains a safeguarding policy which narrowly focuses on children and vulnerable adults, mirroring the safeguarding policies of organisations normally involved in the care sector. It does not reflect its duty of care to the overall membership, whether they are classed as vulnerable/at risk or not; and it does not illustrate any seriousness about addressing the risk of discrimination and harassment to any member of the Party.

The Green Party, like many other organisations, has in recent years shifted its social justice efforts to identity focused “progressivism”, a shift that is reflected in its approach to safeguarding. This is most notable in its focus on the concept of “safe spaces” and its impact on freedom of speech and open debate within the Party. This includes stifling debate about issues that address the safeguarding of children and vulnerable adults. If safeguarding, based on known risk factors including biological sex, cannot be discussed then the only ‘safety’ which is being protected is that of potential abusers. If male potential abusers cannot be named as such then there is no safeguarding for women and girls. And if anyone can identify as anything, it makes a nonsense of any boundaries and protections.

Safeguarding failures in the Green Party

Select the links below to explore a number of safeguarding failures identified in the Party.

Vetting

Many people should be aware of the Aimee and David Challenor debacle that came to light in 2017/2018. One of the Greens in Exile featured on this site, Andy Healeywas one of the main whistle-blowers who raised concerns about David Challenor, who had been charged with multiple serious sexual offences, including taking indecent photographs, false imprisonment, rape and sexual assault of a child in November 2016. In 2017 Aimee Challenor appointed David as their election agent. Despite Aimee informing the then Party communications co-ordinator Matt Hawkins and chair of GPEX Clare Lorraine Phipps that David Challenor had been charged with sexual offences the Party failed to investigate further and David Challenor was not expelled from the Party until he was jailed for 22 years in 2018.

The Party and its representatives vigorously defended Aimee Challenor who stood for public office knowing their election agent was awaiting trial for the rape and torture of a young girl. Aimee was the prime mover for policies in the Party, such as Self-ID, that raised many safeguarding concerns amongst members who believe such policies make it easier for sexual predators to get access to girls and women.

An independent review into the Party by Verita found that the Party did not fully investigate the background of David Challenor and noted that the Party’s priority was to protect its reputation, not safeguarding; and recommended that the Party urgently review its safeguarding policy. Where is the proud publicising by the Party of the results of that review and the resultant changes to policy and practice, to ensure that never again can a rapist, child abuser and torturer be allowed free reign and influence in the Party?

More recently in the run up to the GE 2024 additional vetting and safeguarding shortcomings became apparent when it became public knowledge that the Party had intended to field a number of PPC candidates with antisemitic views. Another candidate dropped out after it was revealed they had openly engaged with sissy BDSM pornography on social media platforms and liked to make inappropriate sexual jokes, including jokes about having sex with 8 year olds.

Again the latter was vigorously defended by high profile Greens.

Failure to safeguard members against malicious complaints

Every organisation has responsibility to safeguard both their employees and members from malicious complaints, ensuring a fair and just working environment. This duty is rooted in law and the principles of fairness, due process, and the protection of individuals from harm caused by false accusations.

Several Greens in Exile on this site have been the victims of malicious and fictitious complaints, and the Party’s failure to address the way the disciplinary system has been weaponised to remove dissenting voices is a major safeguarding failure.

Failure to safeguard whistle-blowers

Similarly, organisations have a crucial responsibility to safeguard whistle-blowers, ensuring they are protected from retaliation, harassment, and discrimination.

Whistle-blowers often take significant personal and professional risks when exposing wrongdoing, and organisations must take deliberate steps to protect and support them.

Again, several Greens in Exile on this site whistle blew internally to the Party over a range of concerns including safeguarding and data protection breaches before they were either suspended and/or expelled.

Failure to safeguard members with protected characteristics and beliefs

Despite both Sex and Sexual Orientation being protected characteristics under s10 of the Equality Act 2010 (EqA), the Green Party seems less inclined to safeguard its female and lesbian members than it does other cohorts with different protected characteristics. Female members and in particular those who hold the protected EqA belief that human beings cannot change sex are often openly harassed both on the Party’s internal Green Spaces and on social media by other members. This harassment includes cyberstalking, a criminal offence in its own right. Several of these women – and men - have been victims of the weaponised disciplinary system and feature on this site.

Lack of safeguarding culture

In April this year the Cass Review -The Independent Review of Gender Identity Services for Children and Young People was released. The Review highlighted concerns which many in the Party had raised about so-called “gender affirming care” and the use of puberty blockers, cross sex hormones and even surgery to treat vulnerable children and young adults. These concerns were raised with the Party’s safeguarding team when certain groups and individuals in the Party were actively promoting a private, now discredited gender treatment clinic GenderGP. These concerns were repeatedly ignored.

Many other organisations acknowledged the Cass Review’s conclusions – that NHS policy on gender identity treatment has been built upon “remarkably shaky evidence”. In a case brought in the High Court by Keira Bell against the NHS GIDS Clinic the judges stated that there was no apparent alternative therapy to ‘medicalisation’ for patients attending the GIDS Clinic. This led directly to the NHS decision to commission the Cass Review as well as to close GIDS altogether. That in turn led to the then Conservative government introducing a ban on prescribing puberty blockers to new patients under 18, except in extreme cases of gender dysphoria or for the purpose of medical trials which has subsequently been supported by the new Labour Government. On top of that, the senior clinician at GIDS responsible for Safeguarding successfully sued GIDS for constructive dismissal because, after 30 years employment at GIDS, she was repeatedly prevented from protecting the children for whom she was responsible. With this catalogue of failure to safeguard children and repeatedly publicised actions through the Courts it is simply unsustainable for the Green Party to claim that its own failures to protect the rights of its membership were carried out in full compliance with the law.

What did the Green Party do?

Blink and you may have missed it, but on April 16 this year, the Green Party issued a reasonable statement on the Cass Review but then removed it from their website after only two hours due to complaints and threats to withdraw support made to the leadership by LGBTIQA+ Greens.

The Party then failed to respond to concerned members asking why the sensible statement on Cass was removed. To this day the Party still has no official statement on the Cass Review findings. As the Cass Review related to children, so a second review relating to adults has now been commissioned. There is every likelihood that the abuse of safeguarding rights of both individuals and groups will feature in the final report.

By remaining silent the leadership and governance teams are failing to safeguard children and young adults and those who speak out about “gender affirming care” and the dangers of gender ideology not to mention the medicalisation through use of puberty blockers, now banned, cross sex hormones and surgery.

Irrespective of political opinions it remains the responsibility of all in an organisation to take safeguarding concerns seriously, to be aware of potential safeguarding issues, and to report concerns to the appropriate officers, who must bear ultimate responsibility for the organisation’s safeguarding practices. In the Green Party, those officers are the CEO and the Governance Officer. Not only have there been flagrant breaches of safeguarding good practice, but those officers have been found sadly wanting in their responses to whistle-blowers or ‘speaking out’ submissions and appear to have abdicated responsibility for taking a lead on any proactive safeguarding action.

There have also been grave concerns over several years at the Party’s lack of oversight of Young Greens, whose ranks include members up to age 30 and adult students and has no lower age limit. Where is the protection of our young members?