Safeguarding

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.

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?