Andy Burnham must be fairly pleased. Having ticked off a non-disastrous trip to see Donald Trump, the Prime Minister began Labour party conference this weekend with a lead in the polls. All momentum seems to be building towards an early snap election to secure his seat in No. 10 for another five years, even if that is a prospect he has poured cold water on. So what could possibly go wrong?
The “What-is-a-woman?” debacle has split the party bitterly
A building tension between internal Labour groups, bubbling over into full-blown protests at conference, could just be the fly in his ointment. Before the main conference has even begun, Labour is already embroiled in a public row over a decision to exclude men – including men dressed up as women – from Labour’s women’s conference.
In Burnham’s first ever speech as leader of the Labour party, he promised to diminish in-fighting and focus on a common purpose. Yet the “What-is-a-woman?” debacle has split the party bitterly. A handful of MPs are confirmed to be part of the pro-trans protest; meanwhile others, like Jonathan Hinder, clap back on X: “What kind of socialist protests against women organising collectively within their own political party?”.
This is hardly the united vision of a governing party that Burnham hoped to present to the world in Liverpool. More worryingly for the new PM, British politics contains a rather striking warning about what happens when gender politics consumes a government.
Just look north of the border. Nicola Sturgeon had enjoyed years of extraordinary political success before transgender policy became one of the defining controversies of her final period in office. Her Scottish government’s Gender Recognition Reform Bill proposed a system of gender self-identification, making it far easier for men to access female-only spaces, including rape crisis hostels and changing rooms. Westminster blocked the legislation, citing concerns about its implications for women and children. Then came the furore over “Isla Bryson”, a convicted male double rapist who, thanks to gender ideology, was briefly placed in a female prison ward in January 2023. Sturgeon – once a confident communicator and unflappable leader – tripped over herself in a web of confusion over who should and should not qualify as a woman. This issue – and the severe backlash it generated amongst a worried Scottish public – was a catalyst for her resignation in February 2023.
Burnham should pay close attention to this history lesson about the folly of forgetting basic biology. Already, Stonewall campaigners are pushing for more UK legislation that could deeply inflame ideological tensions – both within the party, and across the general public.
The Government’s draft LGBT “Conversion Practices” Bill was published earlier this year, and is undergoing pre-legislative scrutiny. The Bill’s supporters say it will tackle serious abuse and harm caused to LGBT people in attempt to alter their gender identity or sexuality. In reality, such abuse or torture is, obviously, already illegal. What the bill adds to the mix through broad and ambiguous wording is the criminalisation of almost anything other than affirmation of a person’s chosen label, even potentially in the context of a parent-child relationship.
What about the mother who tells her 13-year-old daughter that her body is perfect as it is, and that she should stop using a breast-binder to alter it? What about a pastor who encourages a man to be faithful to his wife rather than explore alternative sexualities? What about a counsellor who thinks a young person should be given time to explore distress about their body rather than being immediately “affirmed”? What about a colleague who feels uncomfortable adhering to requested zir/ze pronouns? All could potentially end up in hot water.
There is an additional oddity. Olivia Bailey MP, the then Minister for Equalities who introduced the draft Bill in June, has now been appointed to the Joint Committee responsible for scrutinising it. She is, in effect, marking her own homework. Other members of that Committee have already firmly nailed their colours to the mast in support of the Bill. These appointments are indicative of a government that is just not taking these issues seriously. The committee was established last week and is due to report in January.
Even the SNP dropped their attempt at a similar “conversion therapy” bill when the public outcry against jailing ‘non-affirming’ parents became untenable.
For Burnham, the battle of Liverpool is an early glimpse of the political fault line running through his party. He can respond by doubling down on a trans ideology of waning popularity – or he can recognise that this bill is simply not worth the headache, and consign it quietly to the Westminster dustbin.
Sturgeon learned that gender politics could overwhelm an otherwise formidable political record. Burnham has the advantage of seeing the warning before the fire starts. He would be wise to heed it.
