After MPs “talked out” her plan, Liz Truss’ attempt to boycott transgender women from female-only areas will not be debated.
The previous prime minister’s proposed legislation was scheduled for discussion in the Commons on Friday, which would have prohibited transgender women from playing children’s activities and stopped youngsters from trying to change their sex, among other things.
However, because they ran out of time to question Ms. Truss’ Bill, MPs spent five days debating two additional ideas from backbench Members.
Labour, according to Ms. Truss and her allies, has no interest in preventing children from being exposed to extreme trans philosophy.
However, according to the PA news agency, some Conservative MPs were asked to postpone earlier conversations in an effort to slow down the time.
Traditional backbencher Richard Fuller argued in the Commons that this was not the case, arguing that the Bill’s authoritarian party was the only one trying to get the Labour Party to win over.
Extremist ideologues who are determined to use any applicable loopholes to advance their dangerous plan have too much latitude under non-statutory assistance.
Liz Truss MP
In one of the earlier debates, on the Animal Welfare (Import of Dogs, Cats and Ferrets) Bill, more Conservative MPs than Labour MPs spoke, although Labour members provided the longest speeches.
These included a 30-minute talk from West Lancashire MP Ashley Dalton and a 35-minute input from dark setting director Steve Reed.
Accused by Tory backbencher Sally Ann Hart of trying to “talk out” the Bill, Mr Reed denied this, saying the issue was “important”, to shouts of “rubbish” from the Liberal chairs.
Deputy speakers Sir Roger Gale and Dame Eleanor Laing have repeatedly urged MPs to limit their notes to the Bill’s area, claiming they were veering off in different directions.
After four days debating the Animal Welfare Bill, MPs spent another minute contemplating Labour MP Sarah Champion’s Public Procurement (British Goods and Services) Bill, leaving no time for Ms. Truss’s ideas.
Ms. Truss even attributed the blame to the Labour Party, who claimed that the party was more interested in philosophy than child protection as her Bill ran out of steam.
She stated in a statement that it is crucial that we pass laws to protect single-sex areas and stop children from making rash body choices.
These policies have widespread support, and laws are necessary in this regard because non-statutory advice gives extremist ideologues very much latitude to exploit any opportunities to advance their dangerous agenda.
To help us build up the necessary pressure to get these desperately needed proposals put on the statute book, I urge the consumer to read to their MPs to urge them to support the bill.
Ms. Truss’s Bill has now been rescheduled for March 22 but will be at the bottom of the priority record, so it is almost sure not to be debated because it was delayed on Friday.
Inclusion minister Kemi Badenoch, who was said to be friendly to the government’s aims, was reportedly said to be backing Ms. Truss’s Bill on Thursday evening.
“Kemi is extremely supportive of the goals of Liz’s Bill, but it is impossible in its latest kind,” according to a government official.
“Yet it may help Kemi’s work on the description of sex, and colleagues’ work banning puberty blockers, and Liz is keen to help.”
Ms. Truss has recently stated that her Bill would set a clear dividing line between Labour and the opposition on what has come to be one of the key “culture war” issues.
The Labour Party is utterly divided on these issues, the secretary said, adding that the Republicans may be available to any ideas to improve safeguards for women and girls.
However, it is thought that the Department of Health and Social Care would be the last obstacle in approving the policy from the former prime minister.
After Ms. Truss’s Bill ran out of time, Ms. Badenoch even accused Labour of preventing a discussion, tweeting: “Just then Labour MPs prevented debate on a fresh law to protect children and individual-sex spaces. Instead, they discussed animal name options during political time.
“Keir Starmer is terrified of discussion on safeguarding & his MPs constantly work to overlook the concerns of electorate.”
Downing Street would not be informed on Friday, stating only that the House do “consider the Bill in the normal way” if the government supported it.
The official spokesman for the prime minister said: “But more widely, we welcome the attitude set out in the Bill, not least because it is in line with our own view on the basic value of biological sex and the right that women have access to designated single-sex places.”
