Latest / UK Column Radio / The Preservation Of Fantasy - Transgender Ideology - With Kevin Lister

Transcript

The Preservation Of Fantasy - Transgender Ideology - With Kevin Lister · UK Column Radio

0:07
Speaker 1: Hello.
0:08
Speaker 2: I'm Charles Mallett and this is a UK Column interview.
0:11
There will be notes and links posted at ukcolumn dot org.
0:17
I'm joined by Kevin Lister, who was working as a
0:20
program leader for math's A level at New College, Swindon
0:25
when he raised concerns of a safeguarding nature for a
0:28
female student who had asked to be called by a
0:32
different name and recognized as having assumed a different gender,
0:37
an action that subsequently has cost Kevin his job. Now
0:42
there's going to be an awful lot to get through.
0:44
But first of all, Kevin, a very warm welcome to
0:48
UK column. Thank you very much indeed for joining me.
0:51
Speaker 3: Thank you Charles, and thank you for having me on.
0:54
Speaker 1: Not at all.
0:55
Speaker 2: Now, before we get to the heart of the matter,
0:58
which is your situation and how exactly it's come about
1:02
and where it's going, what I'd like to do is
1:05
ask you to just cast your mind back to before
1:09
this started and just to give us a sort of
1:12
potted version of your career in academia to that point
1:19
and how you regarded the education system as going the
1:24
sorts of trends that you were then aware of prior
1:29
to what has actually unfolded.
1:32
Speaker 3: Thanks Charles, that's a really interesting and profound question to
1:37
start off on. I guess in answering that, let me
1:42
also give a slightly potted history of me as well.
1:47
So I came into teaching around about forty had been
1:51
in industry beforehand. I'd worked in the oil and gas industry.
1:58
I'd worked in the in the early industry and senior
2:02
management senior project management positions. But my sort of heart
2:08
had always been still in maths, and I had this idealistic,
2:15
egotistical idea, whenever you want to call it, I let
2:18
viewers decide that I wanted to go into education. I
2:21
wanted to go into teaching because I was really concerned
2:26
about where I thought things are going, and I had
2:30
this kind of idea that an important part of my
2:34
life perhaps could be in encouraging young people to become
2:38
conversant with the issues that they will face in the future,
2:42
and that they should be able to articulate those concerns
2:45
and act on those concerns and so forth. So I
2:50
had that kind of an egalitarian, idealistic idea to go
2:53
into teaching. So that was round about two thousand and two.
2:56
I think I came into teaching that did my teacher training.
3:03
I trained to teach maths. I've always been a bit
3:07
of a mass nerd and and you know, I enjoy
3:10
shirting maths and enjoy the discipline of thinking that that
3:14
that maths brings to a person as well and to
3:18
a community and to and to arguments. So things you
3:22
progress along, and I get a job at Cirencester College.
3:26
I really enjoyed working there. I became heavily involved with
3:32
the People and Planet group that was at siences to
3:36
colleges back in sort of two thousands, when Climate camp
3:41
was in its ascendancy in the UK and elsewhere around
3:46
the world, and there was the first of genuine concerns
3:49
about where climate change was likely to be going, and
3:53
that this was a passion of mine. I've been a
3:56
member of a group called Daisy World and beyond them,
3:58
we'd be looking at things like nonlinear changes in the
4:01
climate system. Have been involved in that for quite quite
4:06
some time, and and it was an interesting time in
4:12
the in the in the two thousands, Tony Blur had
4:15
had it was empowered. Tony Blur had made his manifesto
4:20
commitment being education, education, education, And you can argue the
4:24
toss about how effectively that went in and I think,
4:28
to be honest, it was good that there was aspects
4:31
of his of his implementation that maybe didn't go so well,
4:37
but the general thrust was good. He wanted to educate people,
4:40
not just to get people into the workplace to education,
4:42
but to expand knowledge, you know, to to learn music, poetry, literature,
4:48
maths and so so on and so forth. So yeah,
4:50
he had a really you know, wonderful motivation I think
4:53
for doing that for all the criticisms that leveled at
4:56
at Tony Blair and then so two thousand and eight
4:59
nine Climate Camp comes along in the UK then ends
5:04
as a big motivation in the education system to become
5:10
part of that, and Ofsted mandated that when schools were
5:14
to be inspected that they would be inspected on the
5:19
ability to incorporate sustainability into lesson plans. And this kind
5:24
of reached a peak in twenty ten when all schools
5:29
were showing the Al Gore movie The Inconvenient Truth and
5:36
from you from a beginner from climate change. You know,
5:39
that was a good movie to show it. I think
5:42
very much underplayed how serious the crisis was and how
5:45
easy the solutions were. But nonetheless you know, that was
5:50
a start of a fairly significant community conversation with the
5:53
young people about where the future is likely to go.
5:56
And the consequence of that two young people was really dark.
6:03
You know, that was really I think the point where
6:07
mental health really started taking a downward slide amongst young people.
6:12
And then, you know, coming shortly after that, there's the
6:14
advent of smartphones and everything else. A mental health then
6:17
becomes a bigger and bigger issue, and we go down
6:19
and down and down and down in terms that the
6:22
mental health outcomes fit for young people. And we're effectively
6:27
in the sustainability teaching in schools explaining to kids that
6:31
the future is going to be dark and that you
6:34
know that you were going to you're going to have
6:36
to face restrictions and limitations, and even with all of that,
6:39
we're still going to face climate change. That was the
6:41
message that was being given to young people and that's
6:45
a really tough, tough message to give. And then in
6:49
the midst of all of this, then the trans movement
6:52
then starts really making progress into schools. In twenty fifteen
6:57
was when it really started moving into schools. So it
7:01
now plays a complete one hundred and eighty degree came
7:06
to move to the sustainability agenda. Suddenly we've got this
7:11
that this that this movement coming into schools where you
7:14
can be anything you want to be. You can have
7:16
any choice that you want to be. We have rainbows
7:18
and unicorns. We can forget science, you know, we can
7:22
just engage in whatever fantasy that you want. And this, yeah,
7:27
you know, I often think was a reaction from that
7:31
darker side of education, and educators like me ended in
7:38
a situation where it was a totally contradictory environment that
7:43
we are working in. We suddenly have to prioritize a
7:47
fantasy over fact. In fact, we find ourselves in a
7:51
situation where fantasy and that the preservation that the preservation
7:57
of fantasy in the minds of young people is well
8:01
and truly elevated above the presentation of facts and the
8:06
discussion of facts and the discussion of debate. So that's
8:11
kind of I think how I saw education evolving in
8:16
the period that I've been in education from from two
8:19
thousand two, very different periods, you know, pre twenty ten,
8:24
posted twenty ten. And I think you know question I
8:28
used to ask an in class, you know, when I
8:30
was doing data analysis I maybe picked some data analysis
8:33
for my status class from a climate change paper. And
8:38
if I went back in twenty ten and I said
8:41
to students, well, who believes in climate change? Maybe half
8:44
the hands would go if I said, as I did
8:46
just before I got dismissed, who believes in climate change?
8:49
When all the hands go up, everyone's deeply worried and concerned,
8:53
but unable to articulate how that they can actually engage
8:57
in the debate. And they all know young people know
9:00
the future is really super tough and hard for them now.
9:05
So we are now teaching a fantasy again to people
9:08
who haven't to deal with with some terrible facts.
9:12
Speaker 2: The standout phrase that from where we're sort of going
9:15
with the interview is the as you say, the preservation
9:19
of a fantasy. So so sort of using that as
9:23
a as a touchstone to go on now to describe
9:28
what did happen, you know, the bones of the incident
9:31
that has led to your your current situation.
9:34
Speaker 3: I had a student student a she's in my Mass
9:40
and Further Mass class, and she worked hard in the
9:47
in the first year, she didn't get the results and
9:50
tests and things that perhaps that she wanted, all the
9:52
results that she was probably capable of getting so she
9:56
was probably, you know, I would suspect, you know, somewhat stressed,
10:00
and and and and when it starts the second year,
10:05
and obviously just coming back after COVID. When when when
10:08
kids now have this COVID thing to deal with on
10:11
top of everything else. And on the third of September,
10:14
she sends me a note on teams to say that
10:19
she now wants to be known with a new name,
10:21
a male name. So I immediately raised a safeguarding concern.
10:27
I asked three questions. I on my assumption when I
10:33
wrote the safeguarding concern, it was it was obvious that
10:36
she wanted to suddenly be be a male.
10:39
Speaker 1: So I.
10:41
Speaker 3: Said, on the safeguarding concern, did she have parental consent?
10:45
Or do we have parental consent to the college to
10:47
support this? Was she making an informed decision? Was there
10:53
a risk that she was self medicate with cross sex homewards?
10:56
And I referenced the Kira Bell case, and I referenced
11:00
to her academic progress. And I then went down to
11:07
safeguarding a couple of days later to see where they
11:11
got to before I was next you to teach her,
11:14
and asked well, you know what the outcome was and
11:17
what the answer the answers were to my questions. So
11:21
all I was told was there was college policy not
11:24
to tell the parents. You know, I just I couldn't
11:28
believe it. I said, well, you cannot do this, you
11:30
cannot support this without speaking to the parents. First of all,
11:34
I said, well, what about the other two questions? Is
11:36
she make an informed decision and there's there arrest you'll
11:38
take cross sex omens And he said, well, we don't know,
11:41
so maybe you should try and find out. And we
11:44
had a you know, a really quite kind of stand
11:46
up row and I said, I want this elevated further,
11:48
and the safeguarding manager said, no point, it's already been
11:53
elevated and it won't won't be changed. So so at
11:58
no time was I told either college to refer to
12:01
her as a heat Yeah, that was a decision that,
12:06
strangely I'm supposed to make on my own, and clearly
12:08
the college wanted to avoid being caught at the other
12:12
end of that. And whereby if I had changed yeah, yeah, yeah,
12:15
the way I refer to her and the college and
12:19
got deemed responsible by the parents and the college would
12:22
woul then be responsible. So they clearly wanted to deny
12:25
any any responsibility. So I didn't refer to her as
12:32
a he, and I didn't use her that the new
12:34
name that she wanted, because that, to me was part
12:36
of the social transition. And I felt that in a
12:40
really difficult position now because I'd raised a safeguarding concern,
12:43
it was clear it hadn't been answered. And then events
12:46
progress along. Two three weeks after that, we have a
12:51
girl's mass competition, an external competition run by the mass
12:57
Chat charity at the Institute of Maths, and their objective
13:02
is to encouraged girls to go into mass So I
13:04
present this to the class. I say, you know, is
13:07
a test, is a challenge of mass competition. Be really
13:11
good for you all to do it. And you know,
13:13
I'll work with you over the lunchtime to practice it,
13:15
and so on and so and so forth. And I
13:17
write as a girl's names as a girl has put
13:20
the names forward it to go into. I write the
13:22
names on the board and student A says, can I
13:24
still do this? I said, of course, you can be Goose,
13:26
you're a girl. And I put her name, her original
13:30
birth name on the board. I'm not going to put
13:32
a boy's name on it. Yeah, I'm not going to
13:35
you know, it's not my job to associate transition, certainly
13:37
not Yeah, it's it's it's it's a it's a completely
13:40
ridiculous situation. And I certainly wasn't going to say to it, well, no,
13:45
you can't do it because you're now a boyd because
13:46
that would be even more stupid. So I put her
13:49
name on the board, and then subsequently she you know that.
13:52
The students then then had to go up to the
13:56
mass office and enter, you know, so that was the
14:00
the class was a statement of intent to enter. They
14:04
then had to formally enter on a voluntary basis. So
14:08
they all go up, including student A. They all formally
14:12
entered this competition at the VS, not at my VS.
14:16
So because she entered the girl's mass competition, because I
14:18
put her name on the board, then that was me
14:21
deemed to be dead naming her and humiliating her in
14:24
front of the class and so forth. She stayed behind
14:28
after the class though, and she spoke to me, and
14:33
she was worried about doing the competition, not because you know,
14:36
she thought she was a boy, but because she might
14:38
score badly. And I said to look, you know, have
14:42
a go. It's good. You know, even if you get nothing,
14:44
it's good on you. See, it's good to have a try.
14:47
And I'll work with you over the lunchtime so we
14:49
can practice and develop techniques and so and so forth.
14:52
Then she became really emotional and started crying. And I said,
14:55
is it because of your transition and your plan to transition?
14:58
She said yes. So you need to be really careful
15:00
about this. I said, you need to make sure you
15:03
understand the risks. You said, you know, you need to
15:06
make sure you're not getting pushed into it by anybody else.
15:08
You're making this decision, you need to make sure that
15:11
you understand it's irreversible and that and that it's your decision,
15:16
not anybody else's. And she became extremely emotionally about it.
15:18
I said, I won't speak to you about it again.
15:20
But you know, there's the warning that was deemed me
15:24
harassing and bullying her so jenter the competition. I therefore
15:30
then think that she's taken on board my warning that
15:33
she now thinks, well, you know, by entering the competition,
15:37
it's whole way of signaling that she actually doesn't want
15:39
to be a he. And she recognizes that she's a she.
15:42
So I just basically now assume that this thing is
15:45
going to die a death, and she'll she'll come to
15:48
to reason later on that academic year. So this is
15:54
all in September October time. Later on in that academic year,
15:58
in January, her friend and I assume it's a friend,
16:04
but of one of the classmates, Student B, stays behind
16:10
after class and says, student A isn't coming to class
16:14
because you're misgendering her, and Student B then demands that
16:19
I must refer to student A as a male, and
16:23
must refer to her with her new name and so forth.
16:26
So I explained to student B that that I wasn't
16:30
happy doing with doing this. I thought it was a
16:32
safeguarding issue, that there's no science to support this. I
16:37
warned that this is likely to be a legal mindfield
16:39
on the future, and so forth. So she diligently documented
16:43
everything that I said to her, then complained to the
16:46
college using everything I said to his justification for me
16:49
being transphobic. That then then led to my suspension in
16:57
the In parallel to this, I'd been told by my
17:02
boss to go on a transgender training transgender awareness course
17:09
and the course was run by another teacher, employee C.
17:15
Employee C announced her credentials for giving this course because
17:25
her daughter is now presenting as a male, and in
17:28
her words, she had directly supported four other transgender students.
17:34
I just could not believe what I was hearing. And
17:36
then she had presentation, then went on to spout all
17:40
the rubbish from Stungwall and other transgender organizations. So I
17:47
interrupted shortly after she got going when I can see
17:50
where this is going, And I said to what's the
17:53
risk of a false positive in terms of diagnosis, given
17:57
the results of irreversible And this sparked off of a row.
18:01
She claimed that you can't have a false positive because
18:04
you can't make a trans child. Another gentleman claimed that
18:09
the results are into reverse. Well, it just depends how
18:11
much of a transition that you go for, in which
18:14
point I said to him, well, the end objective of
18:17
this is a double meseectomy and women and a castration
18:19
in boys. And and in the judgment that that was
18:24
apparently me making an objectionable manifestation of my of my
18:29
views with yeah, it is a double misseectomy in girls,
18:34
and there's castration and boys that there is the end
18:37
objective of this. So I then immediately after that training session,
18:41
I raised a second safeguarding concern about this. About this,
18:47
this teacher employee c said that, you know, there seems
18:50
to be a risk that we are we are institutionalizing
18:54
the grooming of children into the transgender movement. So so
18:58
I sent that to to to my boss. I'd already
19:01
previously spoken to my boss about following the first safeguarding
19:06
concern about the college policy of not informing students, and
19:12
that was one of the things that that led me
19:14
to being told to go to this transgender awareness course.
19:19
So this second safeguarding concern goes in, It then gets
19:23
used to support a justification of transphobia against me. It's
19:27
never investigated. It goes to to the to the ladder
19:31
after my suspension as evidence of transphobia. Not once did
19:36
employees see uh get get get investigated. Not once in
19:40
my safeguarden concern get investigated. So now you know, I'm
19:44
now kind of into February of that academic here and
19:50
now but two safeguarding concerns, and I'm now suspended for
19:54
being transphobic, and to support the suspension of transphobia. They
19:59
then go through my so media through my Twitter feed
20:01
and Facebook, and you know what, I've raised concerns on Twitter,
20:06
as many people have about the transitioning of children, and
20:10
all that is then used as further evidence that I'm
20:13
transphobic and homophobic and so forth. I then get suspended,
20:20
and then we then go through the the disciplinary process.
20:27
I have a first disciplinary meeting with Assistant Principal Miss Davidson,
20:34
and it's clear she hasn't investigated anything at all. She
20:40
the only thing that she investigates it is my Twitter feed.
20:44
She does not investigate where the accusations have come from.
20:47
She doesn't consider the fact that the only accusations against
20:51
me have come from student B and and in fact,
20:55
in her in her investigation letter, she says another student
21:00
said this, another student said that, another student said said this. Well,
21:03
actually no other students ever said anything of that nature
21:07
at all. It was you know, the ball starts rolling
21:11
and does it moves from one person to the next
21:13
that you know, it's like a snowboard, It just gathers
21:15
more of an outer shell. And everyone then justifies what
21:19
everybody else did in the process. Who are ever going
21:21
back to the to the facts, even though in that
21:24
discipline meeting, I said, I'm extremely concerned about the idea
21:27
of transitioning children and don't see any scientific evidence for it.
21:31
All the evidence that I have seen it it shows
21:34
that it's extremely detrimental and harmful. But you know, all
21:38
that just gets dismissed. So the ball starts rolling now,
21:43
and I'm now in a situation now which really it
21:46
does not matter what I say or do. Anything I
21:49
say or do to support my belief that the transitioning
21:54
or encouragement to transition children, anything I say in my
21:59
defense is immediately going to be used as evidence that
22:02
I am transphobic. Subsequently, I get dismissed, and then I
22:06
get referred to the to the DBS for safeguarding.
22:10
Speaker 2: For a lot of people listening, the term safeguarding seems
22:14
to have become synonymous with turning a blind eye or
22:18
sweeping something under the carpet. We've seen it with the church,
22:22
We've seen it in education, and for certainly for me,
22:26
for I think again, a lot of people we went
22:28
through school without it being a term that was ever
22:32
referred to. Just go back a bit and describe what
22:36
it is supposed to do, how it is supposed to work,
22:39
and also specifically because you did touch on it. The
22:42
fact that the college's response was well, we don't tell
22:46
the parents.
22:48
Speaker 1: Was it only on this issue?
22:49
Speaker 2: I mean if they'd been if you've raised a safeguard
22:51
and concern of a different nature that concerned parents, would
22:56
the college have told the parents. So, so a bit
22:58
about safeguarding, how the safeguarding things should work, and specifically
23:01
on this parental Yeah.
23:04
Speaker 3: Yeah, that's again, that's a really really good question, Charles.
23:07
So safeguarding is elevated and elevated and rightly so. There's
23:11
been some safeguarding catastrophes. You know when you look back
23:16
at history over the last of forty to fifty years,
23:19
and every catastrophe means, you know, we should re evaluate
23:23
our approach to safeguarding, learn from it, develop it, and
23:26
sure we have a safeguarding focused environment. The you know
23:31
what the safeguarding actually means, Well, what it means is
23:33
we put the interests of the child first. We have
23:36
the Children's Act from nineteen eighty nine, which really started
23:40
the ball rolling to develop a safeguarding culture. So I
23:46
was in school in the nineteen seventies obviously before the
23:49
children the Children Act, and that's probably why it wasn't
23:53
such a common thing, and some terrible things happened during
23:57
that time. So we introduced that the safeguarding culture. The
24:03
College introduces a safeguarding policy as all colleges and schools
24:08
must must have, and the kind of the ethos of
24:11
the safeguarding culture is that you, as a teacher, if
24:16
you have if you, as a teacher have a concern
24:20
of anything about a child in any way that affects
24:24
his safety, you are legally bound to raise that concern
24:29
and you should expect that concern to be addressed. The
24:33
other big mantra is that safeguarding is everybody's responsibility, and
24:40
in fact, in the safeguarding policy that the College had,
24:45
they say that all staff have a duty and responsibility
24:48
to safeguard children, irrespective of their role. So for me,
24:54
as a maths teacher, I raise a safeguarding concern, I
24:57
expect that safeguarding concern to be properly investigated. I had
25:01
three questions, as I said, before parental consent and formed
25:04
decision liskit of self medication. None of those questions got answered.
25:09
So I have a responsibility to safeguard. That means when
25:13
I have written to me it means, when I raise
25:16
a safeguarding concern that has not had its questions answered,
25:21
that has been responded to on an ideological basis, I
25:24
cannot in any conscience conclude that by following the expectations
25:30
of the students and subsequently her friend, that I would
25:33
be acting in the in the safe manner towards that
25:36
that that child. So that that's kind of, you know,
25:41
what the essence of safeguarding is, and that's how how
25:45
how it should be played out. Now in answer to
25:48
your other question about informing parents, would the parents be
25:53
informed in any other situation, the answer clearly is yes.
25:57
In fact, in the college's safeguarding policy, it specifically says
26:02
that we should work in conjunction with parents. It specifically
26:07
says we should look out for peer on peer pressure.
26:11
So one of my questions that I raised in the
26:14
discipliney process was student be applying peer on peer pressure
26:17
to student A. The college has dismissed as it ant know,
26:20
we think she's just a good friend without any investigation
26:23
at all. So on this specific issue, then we're not
26:28
going to inform the parents that as far as I'm concerned,
26:31
on this specific issue, Now, had I learned perhaps that
26:35
the student was maybe going to start taking crack cocaine
26:40
and the toilets at lunch time, and I raised that
26:42
I would expect the college to refer that to the parents.
26:46
To me, there is no difference if the student is
26:49
going to take crack cocaine or heroine or whatever else
26:52
as opposed to taking testosterone in the toilets at lunch time.
26:56
In fact, taking testosterone email taking testosterone or being encouraged
27:02
to do so, probably has far greater long term medical
27:07
complications for a student and taking crack cocaine. Yeah, I'm
27:11
not adopted, but I think that's a reasonable supposition. But
27:14
for some reason, it seems to be perfectly okay for
27:18
a school to encourage a child to go to these
27:20
extremist organizations which encourage girls to believe that they are boys,
27:24
and encourage girls to start taking wrong sex homeloids and
27:27
encourage girls to progress down a medical pathway that results
27:30
in double misseectomies. This year, you know, this gets ideologically
27:36
pushed forward, and the college policy is to go against
27:41
this own safeguarding policy not to inform parents in violation
27:45
of its safeguarding policy.
27:47
Speaker 1: It is surreal, Yeah, so surreal.
27:49
Speaker 2: Is the right word, and you and you know, you
27:51
get to the heart of it by describing it as
27:53
being an ideological response, or at least a response on an
27:55
ideological basis. Was that ever sort of specifically articulated admitted to?
28:01
I mean, did they state outright that well, given the situation,
28:04
because it concerns this issue, that is why we're not
28:07
going to tell the parents.
28:08
Speaker 1: Was that actually sort of admitted to? No, the.
28:13
Speaker 3: I was really surprised when when I was first told
28:16
the college policy was not to tell the parents. This
28:18
is back in twenty twenty one. I just couldn't believe it.
28:25
And then, to be honest, I wasn't any expert at
28:28
all on the transgender movement. I didn't really understand what
28:31
its motivations were other than the only expertise I had
28:36
was I didn't feel it was it was a sensible thing,
28:40
you know, I read a lot of history. My reading
28:44
of history led me to believe it was it was
28:46
similar to to other idealistic, ideological motivators of the past.
28:54
So I was extremely uncomfortable about it. But it hadn't
28:57
occurred to me that one of the means by which
29:00
the trans movement would try and progress would be to
29:04
overtly develop that split between a child and a parent,
29:09
and and and the fact that a school was actually
29:14
supporting that strategy. It's just something that had not ever
29:18
occurred to me. So when when it was? When when
29:21
I was first told the college policy was not to
29:23
tell the parents, I was just just I was so dumbfounded. Yeah,
29:29
I don't even really know how to how to respond properly.
29:33
The college subsequently checked with a safeguarding manager, what this
29:37
is policy? The safeguarding manager said, if a student asked
29:40
for a name change, and we go along with a
29:42
name change, irrespective the fact that that name change is
29:44
associated with the desire to change from from female to male.
29:49
So one of the things that actually happened in New College,
29:53
you'll comming back to your question about safeguarding, is that
29:56
the safeguarding process, the safeguarding officers had become completely subservient
30:04
to the transgender ideology. So the safeguard, the designated safeguarding lead,
30:10
is the one that used my second safeguarding concern as
30:15
a as a tool to accuse me of being transphobic.
30:20
The safeguarding manager would appear to be the one who
30:24
said that the college policy is not to tell the
30:26
parents and basically to support the trans movement. The safeguarding
30:30
officers was three involved. The safeguarding officer followed the lead
30:34
of the other two without question. So the safeguarding vehicle
30:40
that should have been providing that independent safety oversight has
30:45
been completely corrupted to support the trans ideology. And this,
30:50
I think is a pattern that is pretty common across schools,
30:58
across government, civil servants, the civil service, across the police.
31:04
The people who are intrusted in the protection of safety
31:08
of children have been the ones that are now complicit
31:13
with this appalling indoctrination of young people and basically feeding
31:19
young people into the sausage machine of the transgender ideology.
31:25
Speaker 1: Yeah.
31:26
Speaker 2: Absolutely, And you know, corruption is precisely the right word.
31:30
And you talk about the deliberate split or the overt
31:33
effort to split that relationship between child and parent, and
31:39
I guess believe.
31:40
Speaker 3: If you just make one other comment on that. So
31:42
I went public when I got fired, principally to protect
31:48
young people in New College, London. I wanted to get
31:52
this on the record so that parents in the college
31:55
knew what was happening, that safeguarding was not being addressed
31:58
and we'll talk about it later. I'd tried everything that
32:01
I possibly could to try and get this elevated in
32:04
terms of referring to to to the the local authority,
32:08
to the police, to the Department for Education of said
32:11
and so on and so forth, and everything was ended up
32:14
as a blank. You know that I tried to go down,
32:19
so I had no option, I felt, other than to
32:21
go public what I discovered very quickly, and in the
32:25
back of my mind, you know, I was always worried
32:27
I'd made a mountain out of a mole hill, and
32:29
maybe I should have just just gone along with this
32:31
show and probably nothing would have happened, and so forth.
32:34
But what I quickly discovered was a significant number of people,
32:40
almost like one a week in terms of parents will
32:43
contact to me to say what had happened to their child,
32:47
that their child had been transitioned in their school behind
32:50
their back, and they as parents had not been told
32:54
about it, and and that split had been deliberately engineered
32:58
between the parents and the and the children. So this
33:03
was you know, this was an endemic thing. This is astant,
33:06
systemic thing across the country where the movement has engineered
33:12
strategically this this split between children and parents.
33:18
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, well this is exactly what I what I
33:20
want to get into and to extend this because you
33:22
you know, like I was saying, you're talking about corruption,
33:25
which is exactly what it is. It's endemic, it's infiltrated
33:27
absolutely everything. It's it's been well laid, well prepared, and
33:31
of course it's sort of it encapsulates those that are
33:35
doing it absolutely wilfully and mindfully, but also the people
33:38
who are just blindly going along with it because.
33:39
Speaker 1: It seems to be the thing to do.
33:41
Speaker 2: Now, we started to talk about your disciplinary process and
33:45
the you know what it was that precipitated your departure,
33:47
and just we've we'll go back into the going public
33:50
thing and that side of it, but just to go
33:52
through the process and all the other agencies that you've
33:56
had to deal with and you've come across and found
33:59
exactly the same thing that that effectively, it's like a
34:02
chessboard where every move has been covered off in advance.
34:06
So I don't know however, sort best or easiest for
34:09
you to do it to explain how each agency that
34:12
you've had dealings with has in effect completely thwarted or
34:17
just laid ideology upon ideology and perpetuated the horror.
34:21
Speaker 3: Yeah sure, thanks thanks again and anothernother great question, Charles,
34:25
and I think my involvement with agencies had been characterized
34:32
on my side by total and utter unbelievable naivety. As
34:37
I look back and what you're you know, what you're
34:39
saying is really quite true. With hindsight, it's clear that
34:43
the game had been set, you know, you know that everything,
34:47
all avenues had been shut and there's a coordinated effort
34:51
to do so. And I really hadn't hadn't quite understood
34:54
that until I started going through the process. So so
34:58
to let me kind of go go through and try
35:00
and answer what you said there. So I get suspended
35:05
on February twenty eighth on the grounds I have caused
35:10
emotional harm to a transitioning student. And in the opening
35:19
statement of the suspension it's a safeguarding risk that I
35:23
have done that. So where does the accusation of emotional
35:27
harm come from? But never came from the student. The
35:30
student was asked what she wanted to happen. She wanted
35:33
me to refer to her as a boy and then
35:35
she would start coming back to class. So there's no
35:37
emotional harm. She just wanted me to refer to her
35:41
as as a boy. So with that the first porter
35:46
call and the process is the the investigation meeting. So
35:49
I give everything that I can, thinking that if I
35:54
explain as best as I can or it will be
35:57
listened to reasonably, and that on accordingly. So I explained everything,
36:01
but then everything just gets used against me. As I
36:03
said earlier on everything I say in my defense is
36:07
used as evidence against me of transphobia. And so I
36:13
get the report coming back from the investigation. Mean, I
36:16
just could not believe the report. It made no reference
36:20
at all to any of the concerns that I had made.
36:23
It didn't reference to safeguarding concerns that I had raised,
36:28
It didn't reference the fact that those safeguarding concerns hadn't
36:31
been answered and so forth. So then I realized, well,
36:36
actually there's going to be a bit of a fight
36:37
coming on here. So I first of all contact the police,
36:42
because that's what it says in the safeguarding policy that
36:44
if you've raised a safeguarding concern and it's not being addressed,
36:47
then the next protocol is the police. So I contact
36:49
the police, and I say that it seems to me
36:52
that there is institutionalized grooming that you call is Swindon
36:56
and Wiltshire Police are massively involved in the LGBT pride
37:03
and community events around the Swindon and Wiltshire area. And
37:08
they write back and say, well, we can't see anything
37:10
wrong with this. I say, well, the students potentially going
37:13
to take testosteron, you know, I don't know if she's
37:15
been pushed into this by anybody else and so forth,
37:18
and nothing at all I could say to the police
37:20
would encourage them to think that this could be a
37:22
child at harm. They then say, well, if you want
37:27
this raised, then raise it to the MASH, the Multi
37:30
Agency Safeguarding Hub at Swindon Council. So I raise it
37:34
to the MASH, but by which time the college has
37:37
also referred me to the LADD of the local Area
37:40
Designated Officer and that they're basically the same people. So
37:45
I raise my concern to the MASH. I say that
37:48
I have raised two safeguarding concerns, neither of them have
37:52
been answered. I list out all the concerns that we've
37:56
got at the risk of a teacher being non uh
38:00
non biased that's encouraging students down this pathway I reference
38:06
the failure of my first safeguarding concern to be answered,
38:10
and it goes to a lady in sunder Borough Council
38:14
beneath Feis, who seems to be a wonderful person. She
38:20
was a safeguarding officer, and she says, well, it looks
38:24
like there's you know, the Kevin's concerns are valid and
38:28
the college should investigate them. So she organizes a meeting
38:34
to convey that message to the college and and and says,
38:38
you know, here are are the the concerns. The college
38:43
completely ignores. They don't do any further investigation of the
38:48
of the of the concerns. Now, the other problem as
38:51
well is that the LADDO can only oversee, it can't
38:56
actually investigate or direct. So the laddo basically say as well,
39:00
it's up to you Swimming College to do the investigations
39:03
and complete the safeguarding. The college doesn't come back. And
39:07
because the college didn't come back and the college persistent
39:10
to say that I was a safeguarding liability, the ladder
39:14
then says, well, yeah, he's a safeguarding liability. And they
39:17
ignore all the complaints that I make through the mash,
39:23
So yeah, I see that this is not going the
39:26
way that it should go either. You know that the ladder,
39:29
the local area designated officer for safeguarding, is not going
39:34
to ensure safeguarding is taking place. They're just going to
39:37
take an entirely passive position to it. So then contact
39:42
the Department for Education through the fistle blowing and I
39:46
say same thing. I raised two safeguarding concerns. Neither them
39:50
have been investigated. Please please investigate, will you? And the
39:55
DFE right back and say nothing to do with us
40:00
employment issue. I said, this is not an employment issue.
40:03
This is a safeguarding issue. The fact is I'm going
40:06
to be dismissed is irrelevant and I'm reconciled to that.
40:10
So the DF do nothing at all. There's one bit
40:14
of correspondence between the DF and the and the college,
40:18
and that's about it. I then raise it with Osted,
40:22
with the help of a couple of MPs, Miriam Kates
40:26
and my MP Danny Krueger, and Osted acknowledge that safeguarding
40:33
is at risk in the college. They do a safeguard,
40:36
They do an inspection in January. I don't know if
40:39
it was triggered by my complaint, And in the osted
40:44
report of that inspection. They specifically, well, in fact, the
40:53
college gets deemed it and must improve in all areas,
40:57
every area. The one thing thats dead say is good
41:01
is the lgbt Q plus I, a club where staff
41:05
and students are working together. And they also then say
41:09
that it seems that there are some safeguarding, some safeguarding
41:13
refills that haven't been addressed. So even OFSTED completely and
41:17
utterly failed. So every single organization that should have been
41:25
ensuring and providing oversight and ensuring that safeguarding was in place,
41:29
every single one of them had completely capitulated to this ideology.
41:35
Not one organization had said, well, maybe after the cure
41:40
of l case, after the Tavastock exposures and so forth,
41:44
you know that there might be a risk to encouraging
41:47
young young people to to progress down down this this
41:51
this pathway. So the college then, obviously knowing they're not
41:56
that they're going to get support from all areas, then
41:58
continues on its process. Tonight, I get I get fired.
42:02
I get fired in September twenty twenty two. I then
42:08
appealed it in November twenty twenty two, and obviously the
42:14
appeal fails as well as I expected it to be,
42:19
and then I get referred to the DBS. Now where
42:24
things take an even darker turn, and the DBS again
42:29
to sort the view. Is the Disclosure and Barring Service.
42:33
The DBS was put in place after the Soha murders,
42:39
when Ian Huntley murdered Jessica Chapman and Holly Wells. A
42:45
horrific refica event where this guy was known to some
42:51
authorities and had managed to sneak through the cracks and
42:55
become a janitor in the school and then and then
42:57
pray on two children and subsequently murder them. And in
43:02
many ways that's got similarities to here that you know,
43:06
there's a crack in the system and some person with
43:08
vested interests exploits that in the same way that the
43:12
trans community have exploited what's happening today. So DBS gets
43:17
set up, the idea being to bring together all information
43:22
on a person such that when a regulated deployer like
43:26
a school, hospital or charity is taking on a new person,
43:31
they go to the DBS and see if that person
43:33
has got DBS clearance. Now, where it goes really really
43:40
seriously wrong is that the DBS we're given discretionary powers.
43:46
So anybody like a college like New College, who've addressed
43:51
a safeguarding concern on an idological basis can then refer
43:55
me to the DBS and say I was a safeguarding failure.
44:00
DBS and say, well, yeah, you know, we're into all
44:02
this transgender ideology, so clearly he is a safeguarding failure.
44:07
So they then put me on the children's Bard list.
44:12
I'm then, because I've raised two safeguarding concerns, and I
44:17
would argue because I've acted in accordance with the safeguarding
44:21
policy that the college had, not its gender reassignment policy.
44:25
Then because I've done that, then I end up being
44:29
deemed as as as such a terrible person as he
44:32
and Huntley or you know, any any other pedophile or
44:36
child murderer. And you know, this is now where things
44:39
are really getting bizarre, that we're now in a situation
44:43
where when we do not agree with an ideology, we
44:48
have a system in this country to fact to determine
44:53
that you are guilty before you are proven innocent, and
44:57
in fact, it's almost impossible to prove yoursel innocent once
45:00
you're on the Bard lists as well, we have got
45:03
a system now that is the complete counter of everything,
45:08
of every legal philosophy that a democratic society is based upon.
45:13
Speaker 2: Absolutely, we have get just go on. I mean, it's
45:17
it is terrible to listen to. But just the ramifications
45:20
of being on that list, the Children's barred list. Just
45:23
explain how that pertains to your situation, and also how
45:32
it affects the view of other agencies, and also how
45:36
because you mentioned to me the other day the difference
45:39
between that and say, serving a prison sentence.
45:42
Speaker 3: Sure, yeah, yeah, the ramifications of being on the Children's
45:46
bard list are absolutely terrible. You are socially ostracized for
45:53
the rest of your life. So once you're on the
45:55
DBS list, you cannot get off it. You can appeal
45:58
it after twenty five years. Well I'm sixty and I'll
46:01
probably be dead back by by then. So it is
46:05
social ostracization. It's something that Socrates had argued, had talked
46:10
about back in Greek times, about the you know, the
46:15
ability to socially ostracize people as a form of punishments,
46:19
as a as a really powerful form of punishment. So
46:26
your social ostracized. It means that I cannot get a
46:29
job teaching anywhere and any school that was to employ
46:33
me would be subject to at least a five thousand
46:35
pounds fine. I cannot help anymore at my local athletic club.
46:43
So you know, I used to help with the annual
46:46
sports events. I would rake the grass, I'd rake the
46:48
sand at the end of the high jump and help
46:51
time the the the runners coming across the line. But
46:54
you need they want everybody to be DBS squared and
46:57
rightly so, so I can't do that anymore. I can't
47:01
drive a van for Tescos. So Tescos want DBS clearance,
47:08
and rightly so, because if you're taking parcels and food
47:10
packages into into into into people's houses, then Tescos right
47:15
they want to have people who are safe to do so.
47:19
And that's important to me because being unable to get
47:22
a job anywhere else, I try to train as a
47:24
van driver. Yeah, I have a two master degrees, the
47:28
Master's and Business qualified teacher, and I end up trying
47:32
to become a van driver. And I can't even become
47:34
a van driver for many places because I need DBS clearance.
47:41
And also, you know, a good number of of my
47:45
of people who I've known over the years, suddenly are
47:48
questioning and rightly so, you know, is the merit and
47:51
the fact that I might be you know, and he
47:53
and hunty child murderer. You know that there is always
47:56
that explanation I feel like and yet that I owe
47:59
people who have known me for many years. That's a
48:02
stressful explanation to try and go through, and there always
48:05
will be the element of doubt in the back of
48:08
their mind. It is an extraordinarily draconian punishment for a
48:13
society to be able to hand out to hand this
48:17
this this uh, you know this this guilt before before
48:22
in innocence, you know that you are presumed to be guilty.
48:25
And as I said, you know this is done on
48:28
a discretionary basis. This is this is this has implications
48:33
far beyond the transgender movement. And again coming back to
48:38
the point I made earlier on as well in our
48:42
previous conversation about comparing it with a prison sentence. Yeah,
48:46
if I was to be say, like one of the
48:49
one of the protesters, thugs or whatever you want to
48:52
call them. They've been in the street in recent days
48:56
when I punched a policeman in the face and I
48:58
get three years, as as someone has just has done
49:01
when I come out of prison after three years for
49:04
punching a policeman in the face. It is determined by
49:07
society that I have paid my debt and at that
49:10
point that you know, that person who's committed that crime
49:14
can then proceed to integrate back into society. Once you're
49:19
on the children's bard list, that option is not provided you.
49:23
You know, you are on it permanently, and you're at
49:26
the whim of the DBS after twenty five years as
49:29
to whenever not that they will accept your further pleadings.
49:33
So what I'm having to do, and what I'm doing
49:34
at the moment is we're pushing this through the upper tribe,
49:37
you know, basically seeking a judicial review, and that process
49:41
has been on the go now for a year and
49:43
a half. So it's yeah, your ability to try and
49:47
prove your innocence is extremely slow, you know, once you're
49:51
the that says it's almost it's so difficult to try
49:55
and get off it.
49:56
Speaker 1: Yeah.
49:57
Speaker 2: Absolutely, And now I want to get to the you know,
50:02
it's a terrible position that you've been forced into, put into,
50:06
ended up in, and I want to get on to
50:08
talk about the support that I hope you have felt
50:12
that you have had not universally, obviously, but from certain quarters.
50:16
But just before we do that, let's just talk about
50:18
the legal side of it, because that in itself is fascinating,
50:22
and I know there's any limited amount of time to
50:24
talk about it, but I think I'm right in saying
50:26
that the particular area of law concerns what's referred to
50:30
as compelled speech, which is the sort of the other
50:32
side of the protected speech coin. Will you just describe
50:37
that sort of side of it?
50:40
Speaker 3: Sure? So, so I took my case to the employment tribule.
50:44
I ended up having to represent myself the union that
50:48
my union walked away sitting and because it went my
50:52
case went against the LGBTQ plus philosophy that was the NEEU.
50:58
My insurance company wouldn't support it because it kind of
51:03
went across the diversity policies as well, and through a
51:08
few other things. I spent a lot of money basically
51:11
getting nowhere, and I ended up having to represent myself.
51:15
So I suddenly lost in the employment tribunal. One of
51:19
the things that was used against me was the fact
51:21
that I was on the children's bar list. The college
51:25
had no other evidence. I hae harassed that the student
51:28
that I debated and appropriately in the class as they claimed.
51:31
The only thing that really they had against me that
51:33
ied harassed was the fact that the DBS had put
51:37
me on the barless as a consequence, and my case
51:42
for discrimination was very much weaker. Now the college had
51:49
a gender re assignment policy. You know, viewers can ask
51:52
why should a college have a gender reassignment policy for
51:55
a start. Within that gender reassignment policy, tucked away and
51:59
the pend it's three at the very back was an
52:02
instruction that said that that we should use the preferred
52:09
pronoun and if you make a mistake, correct yourself and
52:13
move on. Now, we've appealed the the tribunal ruling on
52:20
the basis of that that this is clearly a policy
52:26
that is intended to make you think that that you
52:31
have that you were wrong to change your your your views.
52:36
You know, the fact that it demands to say that
52:39
if you make a mistake, move that, then correct yourself
52:42
and move along. Well, I never made a mistake. You know,
52:45
I'm not going to believe that a girl as a
52:47
boy and a boy as a girl. And as far
52:49
as I'm concerned, a girl is a girl and a
52:51
boy is a boy. Now the judgment based we based
52:57
itself on the argument that that was harassment to a
53:01
person with the protected characteristic of gender re assignments. Then
53:06
this is where the Equality Act starts falling to pieces.
53:09
So the Equality Act has got the nine protected characteristics.
53:13
Nine I think it is one which is protected characteristic
53:16
of gender reassignment. In the judgment, the judge referred to
53:22
Jaguar versus Taylor, whereby the person in that case, a
53:27
transgender person in that case, had no intention of proceeding
53:31
with surgery. And what the judge said in my case,
53:35
and referring back to the previous case, is that it
53:39
does not matter where you are on the spectrum that
53:42
you have the protected characteristics. So as soon as you say,
53:48
as soon as the person says that, well, that's it,
53:50
you know I am now in the wrong sex, then
53:53
that's it. You know, they have the full protected characteristics.
53:56
It doesn't matter what the age of that person is,
53:58
it doesn't matter what the mental compety to that person is,
54:01
it doesn't matter if that person has been pushed into
54:03
that by peer pressure. The judge has ignored all of
54:06
that because the Equality Act ignores all of that. So
54:11
his argument is that the College gender assignment policy was
54:18
basically a proportionate means of a legitimate aim. The proportionate
54:24
means basically meaning that I should change the way I speak,
54:27
I should act in a way counter to my beliefs
54:31
to support this legitimate aim of effectively encouraging young people
54:37
to transition. I mean, the whole thing makes absolutely no
54:40
sense at all. So on that statement, on that statement
54:45
about about the compel speech about you know, if you've
54:50
made a mistake, move on, then we've raised our appeal
54:56
on That is one of the grounds that we have
54:58
raised our appeal.
54:59
Speaker 2: On extraordinary, extraordinary area, especially when it's actually written into
55:04
a school policy. You know, that's on top of the
55:07
absolute failure of the so called safeguarding system to deal
55:11
with any of this, and of course leaving children all
55:15
over the country completely vulnerable to this ideology and all
55:19
the rest of it.
55:20
Speaker 3: Yeah, I would say, also, you know, when you look
55:23
at the gender, when you look at the cause he act,
55:27
the protected characteristic of gender reassignment is the only protected
55:31
characteristic that has a mental illness at its heart. You know,
55:37
people don't just wake up in the morning and think, ah, yeah,
55:40
I've just realized that all my problems were that I
55:42
was born in the wrong body. You know, you come
55:44
to that conclusion because there is most likely other trauma
55:48
going on in your life, or that you've been indoctrinate
55:50
or brainwashed or whatever else. But yeah, you don't just
55:53
suddenly wake up in the morning thinking oh, yeah, I
55:56
don't wake up in the morning looking down, I think
55:58
I need to remove my testicles and us. Yeah, it
56:02
is something that you are pushed into, forced into, and
56:06
the de transitioners that have now been speaking out, you know,
56:09
testify to that in the most terrible, terrible, terrible ways
56:14
the pressure that they that they were were were put under.
56:17
But nonetheless, Equality Act ignores all of that. It assumes
56:23
that this mental mental illness, mental health related issue should
56:28
be treated in the same way as age or disability,
56:33
or or or or gender or anything else. I mean,
56:36
it's completely and utterly absurd. We've got an absurd law
56:42
that can be manipulated in any way, can be interpreted
56:46
in any way. And for somebody like me, a teacher,
56:50
you know, you are always always at the tail end
56:54
of that. You know, you know, you're always a victim
56:56
of every single single step. And as you said earlier
56:58
on and and from my experience, when every single institution
57:03
in the country has capitulated to this, you almost have
57:07
no chance to try to try and fight it. So
57:09
it's hardly any surprise there's so many teachers in this country,
57:13
you know, as supporting this in the classrooms, probably against
57:17
the better judgment. And no surprise that so many young
57:20
people are being suckered into this, or have been suckered
57:22
into this by the schools. And unless there's changes, they
57:26
still will.
57:27
Speaker 2: Be absolutely and that's really just you know, one thing
57:31
we can get into, perhaps briefly, is the well in
57:35
your view, you know, is their change and is their
57:38
change of any in any meaningful sense. We've had we've
57:41
had the Cast Report. We've had pushed back from certain
57:44
groups that one might have considered, you know, for example,
57:46
gays against groomers and those sorts of things. There are
57:49
there are sensible voices speaking out against this, and there
57:53
have been some notable sort of success is perhaps not
57:58
quite the right word, but you know, change it. Do
58:00
you think that's actually meaningful at all? I mean, where
58:04
where is this going?
58:06
Speaker 3: I think it's good that there's been pushed back. The
58:08
CAST report was a good step. It's good that groups,
58:12
as you say, like Gays against Groomers are pushing forward.
58:16
It's interesting I think that actually some of the biggest
58:20
pushback is fromm from gay people. Many of my gay friends,
58:27
openly gay friends have been the biggest pushes backers of
58:34
of this because they know they themselves could have been
58:37
victim of this where when they were younger. So yeah,
58:40
so good, Yeah, there's there's there's evidence coming forward. But
58:44
there's a problem here which I don't think sometimes that
58:49
we we properly understand and consider. And the problem is
58:52
this is that this trans movement is a movement that
58:56
was never based on fact. You know, the have a
59:00
stock in a freedom of information request had admitted in
59:04
some of their corresponds back in twenty fifteen that there
59:07
was no evidence to support what they were doing. So
59:10
they have always been acting to support a fantasy and
59:14
an ideology, and they've always been been doing so in
59:18
the absence of evidence. So when the cast report comes along,
59:23
or when Gays against Groomers provide evidence, or when people
59:26
like Richie Chua, you know, give the terrible testimony that's
59:31
basically providing evidence, but they know and their philosophy is
59:36
to ignore evidence. So Cast comes along and we end
59:40
up in this bizarre situation. Now, the thing that people
59:44
like the NEEU are voting to ignore the Cast report,
59:49
the BMA of voting to disavow the Cast report. So
59:53
just getting evidence alone is not going to be enough
59:58
against an ideology who's base is to ignore evidence and
1:00:02
to avoid evidence. And also, as I said right at
1:00:05
the beginning, we are in a society now that is
1:00:07
anti intellectual, that is pro fantasy and anti fact. So
1:00:12
just evidence alone is not enough. You know, we need
1:00:14
to win this through the court decisively. You know, we
1:00:19
can't rely on politics because you know, we just had
1:00:21
a change of government. We've now got a new Education
1:00:24
secretary who's come in who's committed or is certainly making
1:00:28
sounds now about watering down and diluting the guidance that
1:00:33
was eventually issued by the last government. We need to
1:00:36
win this one in law. You know, we need to
1:00:38
fight this through law fit, and we need to go
1:00:41
after the institutions who have done this, that have caused
1:00:44
so much harm. And I think also personally, we need
1:00:48
to go after the people individually, you know, the head masters,
1:00:52
the teachers who have individually and knowingly inflicted this kind
1:00:56
of harm on young people and they need to feel
1:01:01
this in their pockets financially big style.
1:01:04
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think you are absolutely right to concentrate on
1:01:07
the individuals. I think it's too easy to look at
1:01:11
a sort of faceless corporate opposition where where it's you know,
1:01:14
it's like nailing jelly to the wall. Whereas these are
1:01:18
the decisions made by individuals. This is what is affecting
1:01:21
people's situations. But just quickly your current situation sort of
1:01:26
in terms of next steps, what's happened, what's going to happen?
1:01:31
Speaker 3: Sure, So next steps is the Upper Tribunal have instructed
1:01:36
the DBS to complete their review as to why they
1:01:40
put me on the bardless by the twenty eighth of August.
1:01:46
The Upper Tribunal have said, if the DBS do not
1:01:49
remove me from the bardless, then they will expedite a
1:01:55
hearing so we can plead our case in the in
1:01:58
the Upper Tribunal. The eighth of August is going to
1:02:01
be a pivotal day so that the DBS will have
1:02:04
to justify why they have put me on the on
1:02:09
the bardless. So they'll have to justify things that they
1:02:12
have said in the past against me, that I was
1:02:15
to go on the bardless because I had taught scientific facts,
1:02:18
and that I appear to be against the transitioning of children.
1:02:21
Now these are the reasons why I ended up on
1:02:24
the on the bardless. Twenty eighth of August is it
1:02:27
is a big day. We've just been advised by the
1:02:31
Employment Appeals Tribue. You know that our grounds for appeal
1:02:35
have been accepted and the preliminary hearing will be in
1:02:41
April next year. And basically the ground the grounds for
1:02:45
appeal are as you said before about the compelled speech
1:02:49
and the the breach of law in that, and also
1:02:54
the fact that the tribe you know, ruled against me
1:03:00
on the basis of the fact that I had been
1:03:02
put on the bardless by the DBS. So that's where
1:03:06
the two cases intersect. I wrote to the DBS yesterday
1:03:12
to confirm to the DBS that we have now been
1:03:15
given the right to appeal through the Employment Tribunal. So
1:03:20
further two next the next big things twenty eighth of August,
1:03:24
see what happens they see if the DBS can justify
1:03:27
why I should be on the bardless, and then the
1:03:30
the the the appeal next year if the DBS take
1:03:39
me off the bardless as well as I hope that
1:03:42
they will, and if they acknowledge I should never be
1:03:44
on it, and then we'll immediately then look at taking
1:03:47
legal action to to recover damages from those who put
1:03:52
me on the list, which is basically New College and
1:03:55
potentially from the DBS as as well.
1:03:58
Speaker 2: Kevin, just tell me, let's try and look at the positives.
1:04:04
I mean, hopefully what you're describing is going to be
1:04:06
positive in terms of, you know, the change of the
1:04:08
situation and vindication and everything else. But tell me, I
1:04:12
hope you have felt like you have received support along
1:04:16
the way, so tell me about that. But also what
1:04:20
is your message to parents and those involved in spaces
1:04:25
where this pernicious ideology is manifesting.
1:04:29
Speaker 3: Sure, so, first of all, I've had amazing support. I
1:04:32
mean just just you know, you know, messages of support.
1:04:35
I put my crowd thunder up. I never really publicized it.
1:04:38
I didn't really want people to have to feel that
1:04:41
they should contribute to this. I felt at the time
1:04:47
there was more important things, more important places for money
1:04:49
to go, like Ukraine and so forth. But no, no,
1:04:53
less people have contributed into that, and I am. I'm
1:04:57
just just hugely, hugely, hugely grateful. I've had great help
1:05:01
and support from Anna Lutvi, my barrister. She has been
1:05:07
totally amazing and she's supporting the case now going through
1:05:12
the DVS, through the Employment Tribunal of Appeals Tribunal to
1:05:19
totally great d L Law just been set up from
1:05:22
the Bad Law Project have been been brilliant as well,
1:05:25
so I'm getting great, great, great support. Their parents from
1:05:29
New College have contacted me to thank me for raising
1:05:33
this so that they know what risk that their children face,
1:05:38
and parents across the country whose children have been so
1:05:42
badly damaged and whose families have been so badly damaged
1:05:45
have contacted me to to to support the position that
1:05:49
I have taken. So I'm really really grateful for that.
1:05:53
It would have been tough, to be quite frank, to
1:05:56
continue with with without without that that support. The same time,
1:06:00
I get all the usual rubbish from the from the
1:06:02
transactivist community as well, who you know, really have made
1:06:05
it quite clear that they want to see me dead,
1:06:09
you know, so you know, you take obviously the rough
1:06:13
with with with the smooth. So that yeah, so so
1:06:18
amazing support. I forgot what was What.
1:06:20
Speaker 2: Was the second part really, I think as a sort
1:06:22
of closing remark, is is what is your advice to
1:06:26
parents who have in school and people who are likely
1:06:31
to encounter this?
1:06:32
Speaker 1: Sure?
1:06:32
Speaker 3: Yeah so yeah, so the advice to parents and that
1:06:36
thanks to that the advice appearance is you have got
1:06:41
to be absolutely on the ball here knowing what your
1:06:45
children are being taught. You know, you cannot assume that
1:06:51
you know that that you cannot assume unfortunately the safety
1:06:54
of your child and in any setting it anymore, you
1:06:59
cannot that your child will be saved from from dangerous indoctrination.
1:07:03
And this goes beyond just the transgender movement, you know,
1:07:06
this goes to all kinds of indoctrinations that can happen
1:07:10
through through the education system, through it, through it through
1:07:13
through society. You know, you need to encourage open debate
1:07:17
in your in your household, and you need to encourage
1:07:20
your child to to to be able to have the
1:07:22
courage to open the debate that things as well, you
1:07:26
need to understand the law in terms of what it
1:07:29
can do and what it can't do, and where it's
1:07:31
weaknesses are. And if you try and push things forward,
1:07:36
you know what challenges that you are going to face.
1:07:41
You need to understand the difficulties that children face now
1:07:46
as as well. You know this, this this conflicting world
1:07:50
that has really come to a boiling point over the
1:07:53
last you know, over the last week or so, with
1:07:56
a terrible I don't even like to use riot since
1:08:00
it's almost outbreak now as civil war that we're having
1:08:03
in the country. I think Elon Musk is right.
1:08:05
Speaker 1: To call this.
1:08:06
Speaker 3: We are in a terrible situation now in so many ways,
1:08:11
and that's an awful difficult picture for any young person
1:08:14
to try and make sense of. We as I said
1:08:16
at the beginning, we have a terrible, terrible situation with
1:08:19
climate change, We're gonna we're going to have more immigration
1:08:22
coming into the country. We need to have an educated
1:08:24
discussion about what we can and can't do. We we
1:08:28
have the you know this incredibly, it's the society that
1:08:33
we're you know, we're we're we're forcing diversity into people
1:08:37
and creating divisions in the process. So it is an
1:08:41
extremely complex situation. It's never been more important, I think
1:08:46
now for a child to have the parents to be
1:08:48
able to put their arms around them and say that
1:08:51
as a parent, you love your child, and you're gonna
1:08:53
be there for them, and the child must know that
1:08:57
the parent is the parent and not some transgender organization
1:09:02
can become some sorget person as some some sort parent
1:09:06
as a as a as a trying to to to pretend.
1:09:10
So advice for parents is a tough world, and it's
1:09:14
a tougher world the children than it is for parents,
1:09:17
and and the parents need to show that love, that
1:09:21
compassion more so now than ever I think in the
1:09:24
in the past.
1:09:25
Speaker 2: Kevan, I think that's a that's a very uplifting note
1:09:28
to end on and one that will make people think
1:09:31
very hard about all that you've said. Now, before I
1:09:34
do let you go, will you just tell the audience
1:09:38
where they can either get in touch with you or
1:09:41
find out what's going on, or if there is any
1:09:43
sort of documented evidence of what you have talked about,
1:09:46
where should people look to find that?
1:09:48
Speaker 3: Yeah, so you can find me easily on Twitter. My
1:09:51
Twitter handle is at Kev's tribulation, or just google my
1:09:56
name and and and Twitter. It will come up on Twitter.
1:10:00
I never block anybody. I My messages are open for anybody,
1:10:09
So anybody can contact me any time to seek support,
1:10:13
to argue against anything. That I say or do. So
1:10:17
feel free to contact me at any time. There's a
1:10:20
crowdfunder again, just go to Google go fund me Kevin
1:10:26
Lister the Fight against Transgender Transgender Madness. So I'm fairly
1:10:31
easily discoverable online.
1:10:35
Speaker 1: Excellent.
1:10:35
Speaker 2: Well, Kevin, it's been it's been quite something to listen
1:10:40
to all that you've said, and you will have gone
1:10:43
at a huge amount of sympathy and I just think angst
1:10:46
from the audience who've been had their eyes open to
1:10:49
what it is that not just that you've been through,
1:10:51
but the potential for other people to effectively fullfout of
1:10:55
the same system. Now, all the what you've just told me,
1:10:59
the to get in touch with you and that sort
1:11:01
of thing. We'll be posted with this interview at ukcolumn
1:11:04
dot or so please be sure to share this interview widely,
1:11:08
and if you're not already doing so, please consider supporting
1:11:11
UK Column for five pounds a month so that we
1:11:13
can continue to bring interviews like this to your attention.
1:11:18
And thank you very much for listening. It just remains
1:11:20
for me to thank Kevinnister enormously for a really insightful,
1:11:25
in depth look at a situation that really should never
1:11:28
have happened, but Kevin, thank you very much, indeed for
1:11:30
joining me
1:11:31
Speaker 3: Thank you for having me on Charles