Julie Bindel has a hot from the pan Spectator piece on this Labour policy confusion:

I was pleasantly surprised when I read Labour’s manifesto. Not only did the party promise to end ‘mixed-sex wards’ in hospitals but they also vowed to “ensure that the single-sex-based exemptions contained in the Equality Act 2010 are understood and fully enforced in service provision.”

Soon after the manifesto was published yesterday, a number of feminists tweeted relief and praise about the pledge. It marked a significant shift from Labour’s 2017 manifesto in which the party promised to: ‘…reform the Gender Recognition Act and the Equality Act 2010 to ensure they protect Trans people by changing the protected characteristic of ‘gender assignment’ to ‘gender identity’ and remove other outdated language such as ‘transsexual.’”

She wondered how it had happened, but not for long.

And then Dawn Butler and her Momentum pals began to tweet their own version of reality. This was done, I assume, either in an attempt to pacify the mob, or even worse, to pressure the party into doing something they have not officially committed to.  

First up, Dawn Butler tweeted that:

“UK Labour will reform the GRA to introduce self-declaration for trans people. We will remove outdated language from the Equalities Act. And there is no way spaces will be permitted to discriminate against trans people. That is illegal and it will stay illegal.”

Labour activist Ellie Mae O’Hagan then claimed that Butler’s rewrite is the Labour party “official position”, suggesting that the Equality Act is illegal.

O’Hagan’s linked tweet is [cough] not entirely straightforward:

To be clear, I spoke to someone directly at Labour comms to obtain this statement. I have had absolute confirmation that this is the party’s official position.

What does “someone directly at Labour comms” mean?

Another “absolute confirmation” that isn’t:

I’m delighted Labour has confirmed that “single-sex spaces” mentioned in its manifesto are trans inclusive, and that the party is committed to trans rights. See statement below from a Labour spokesperson:

Note the lack of name and source, but people tracked it down and found it’s not from a Labour official at all but from an LGBT&&& “activist” who doesn’t speak for the Labour party. Sly. It’s almost as if they don’t have good arguments so they have to resort to tricks.

Back to Julie:

One person close to the Labour party told me:

“This is now a matter of frontbenchers and senior staff over-riding the decision of the party at Clause 5. Unprecedented, in my view. If they can do it on this, they can do it on anything and there’s no point in having a democratic policy formulation process.” 

Another suggested that neither Corbyn or Butler really understand either the issues or the implications, saying that:

“Neither the top brass nor the likes of Butler understood what they were agreeing when they overruled the 2017 manifesto on sex-based rights, and now she and her Momentum mates are trying to override it because Butler has been called out by trans-activists. She can’t think in two dimensions, and is very opportunist, playing to a crowd.”

Which doesn’t mean she won’t get her way.