𝓤𝓷𝓲𝓽𝓮𝓭 𝓝𝓮𝔀𝓼

The former head of the Government’s equalities watchdog has accused Labour of “completely abandoning” women’s rights in its handling of the grooming gangs scandal and transgender debate. Baroness Kishwer Falkner, who headed up the Equality and Human Rights Commission from 2020 to 2025, said Labour was traditionally the “party of feminism” – an ethos that has been “lost” by its current cohort of MPs. She suggested that Sir Keir Starmer’s party has failed to stand up for “oppressed and vulnerable” women and girls who were sexually exploited by grooming gangs and left transgender people in a “grey zone” by delaying the release of guidance on the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling in April.

“What really depresses me about the current state of the Labour Party is that they seem to have completely abandoned women’s rights,” she told The Times. “The traditional party of rights, in my 50 years in this country, was the Labour Party. The party of feminism.”

“I was mentored by a former very senior Labour woman, Shirley Williams,” she continued. “I was aware of women like Harriet Harman, Margaret Jay and Hilary Armstrong.

“Labour women who were committed to feminism in a manner which carefully asserted equality. And I think they’ve lost it. This particular generation of MPs have lost it.”

Baroness Falkner, also claimed that the issue of grooming gangs had only been pushed to the top of the agenda by Baroness Casey’s report in June.

“You would have expected this traditional party to be standing up for women and girls, particularly the most oppressed, the most vulnerable. And it took Louise Casey to remind them of that,” she said.

The baroness, who was appointed under a Conservative government and retired her post just last week, also questioned Labour’s failure to publish guidance from its human rights watchdog on how public bodies and businesses should interpret the Supreme Court’s ruling on gender.

The Government could be wary of setting out guidelines around the ruling that the terms “sex”, “man” and “woman” in the Equality Act refer to biological sex, assigned at birth, for fear of angering MPs, she said.

“We’ve had external counsel, internal counsel, everybody’s looked at it,” she added. “I mean, I’m so certain of the lawfulness of our code that I don’t think I’ve ever been so certain about anything before.

“The other explanation simply is that they’re terrified of their MPs who would wish for trans self-identification or trans inclusion to prevail across all areas of society, including Section 3 of the Equality Act, and would wish for these exemptions not to exist.”

A Government spokesperson told The Telegraph: “We are unapologetic about taking the time to produce legally sound guidance that will guide businesses and organisations.”