Goodness me, this is a bit “tabloid” of you isn’t it guys? Only in the last paragraph do you reveal the truth that the EHRC have no intentions of compiling identifiable information. A more balanced and factual article might have concentrated on the Daily Mail’s deliberately misleading spin, rather than copying it.
I completely agree with you Christine, this website should be challenging the sort of alarmist nonsense the Daily Mail puts out not agreeing with it!
I think this is a very good idea, and not at all dangerous as all identifying information will be removed. If the government is going to deny them a “Sexual Orientation” question on the Census (for fear of showing there are more of us than was expected and therefore upsetting the religious right) then the EHRC have no choice but to get the information they need to do their job properly from elsewhere!
A final thought, do you think the Daily Mail would have expressed concerns if the information were being used to monitor child abuse rather than anti-LGBT abuse?
I’d rather remain “safely” anonymous……..
As my prior comment. Ever seen “V – For Vendetta”. It it nees is a non-benign governemnt and they will come for you.
GENDER = THREE > MALE, INTERSEX, FEMALE
PLEASE, GET TO WORK ON IMPLEMENTING THIS REALITY ON EVERY POSSIBLE LEVEL AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
HELP MAKE THE WORLD A BETTER PLACE
If the the EHRC can not distinguish that transgender is not a sexuality then I give up all hope.
But its no surprise, as they turned down having Christine Burns as a commissioner, so they now totally lack any understanding of of trans matters at all.
With the amount of evangelical Christian influence in the EHRC data will be manipulated no doubt to attack the LGBT not help understanding.
Just so long as there is full protection under data protection laws, and that consent is given by individuals in advance, seeing as they could pass it onto third parties.
Rahman – Alias (Abu Usamah)
When are you going to get over your tantrums because homosexuals have stopped you preaching your hate at City University and University College London. . .
I doubt very much whether the envisaged safeguards already supposedly in place actually do work, having had two experiences which demonstrate that supposedly confidential information about myself has not been kept in restricted access. I fear that the more opportunities there are for this information to be more widely disseminated, the less effective will be its protection. Remember all the accidental and negligent leaks of data there have been from Government departments of sensitive personal information of all kinds. Do I trust them? No way!
I would imagine many people don’t inform hospitals about their sexuality , so the data gained wouldn’t be accurate for a start. And I agree with Jane. I wouldn’t trust my private information to an organisation whether it could be directly connected to me or not.
@ Jane: Agree with you entirely. I’ve also given medical information, which has included my being gay on forms, unfortunately to find out later that the information had been passed on without my consent. It doesn’t bother me in terms of consequences as there were none, but it bothered me a great deal that my right to privacy concerning facts about myself had been violated. A breach of trust.
Giving out information such as sexuality is confidential information. Not only is sharing this information wit others a breach of the Hippocratic oath, it almost certainly goes against all the principles of the data protection act.
Phillips is a self-aggrandising wanker that will use this material to his own selfish ends. If anyone knows of this kind of information being given to the EHRC, they should report them immediately.
Make sure to print clearly using block letters. “They” may as well get your private life straight as long as privacy is a thing of the past, a myth.
What’s to hide, anyway? Who cares?
It’s getting more like East Germany every day, vielleicht soll ich mein Deutsch auf-polieren?
I don’t know why anyone listens to any of the rubbish spewed out by the EHRC, here’s what an indepedent firm of consultants had to say about them:
“If the government is going to deny them a “Sexual Orientation” question on the Census (for fear of showing there are more of us than was expected and therefore upsetting the religious right)”
I agree 100% with that Daniel
The religious nuts will assume it was rigged to increase our numbers, just like that survey of who believes in god
1% believed in god and the religious nuts immediately claimed it had was rigged
Actually, vulpus, the article you provide a link to is what the Daily Mail had to say about the EHRC, not what the independent consultants said. Right down to the “quote” in the Mail headline, which, in typical lying Mail fashion, is not a quote from the report at all.
I have no remit to defend the EHRC, but I think we as LGBT people are making a big mistake if we take at face value anything the Mail prints on LGBT or other equality matters.
Pink News ought to know better too than to re-report a Mail article and present it as if it’s fact. The report is complete nonsense – the only thing the EHRC wants to collate is statistical information (for example: there were 779 homophobic and transphobic hate crimes prosecuted in England and Wales last year and 80-something % of prosecutions resulted in a conviction), NOT personal information.
Tim, everything you say about The Mail can be said about The Guardian. Both papers are violently fixated one way or the other, but that doesnt mean they’re wrong all the time.
Remember how the Nazis exterminated Jews so easily? They had massive centalised databases linking people’s ethnicity to their names and addresses.
The Third Reich was the most detailed and documented mass extermination ever, all thanks to the database which they want to force on us.